《CLARITY法案》未能通过——加密货币的未来走向如何？

我也觉得这不会削弱整个行业的势头。

I also don't think it undercuts the momentum of the industry general.

至少目前来看，CLARITY法案最终还是没能通过。

The CLARITY Act has finally failed for now, at least.

但接下来加密货币该怎么走呢？

But how does crypto move forward from here?

代币化的正确做法和错误做法分别是什么，这对加密货币投资者又意味着什么？

What is the right and wrong way to do tokenization, and what does all this mean for crypto crypto investors?

大家好，欢迎收听Milk Road Crypto节目。我们知道，虽然有一项法案能通过立法会很好，但能不再谈论CLARITY法案也是一件好事。

Hello, and welcome to Milk Road Crypto, the show that knows that although it would have been nice to have a bill pass into law, it will be nice to be able to stop talking about the CLARITY Act.

我是主持人约翰·吉伦。

I'm your host, John Gillen.

今天是9月15日，星期二，今天我们请到了阿什莉·埃伯索尔。

Today is Tuesday, September 15, and today we are joined by Ashley Ebersole.

阿什莉是TX的联合创始人兼首席法务官，TX是Soligenetic和Corium合并后诞生的代币化平台。

Ashley is the cofounder and chief legal officer at TX, the tokenization platform born out of Soligenetic and Corium and the merger that they just went through.

在那之前，他是施乐公司的总法律顾问，但再往前，他其实在SEC内部工作过。

Before that, he was the general counselor at Xerox, but before any of that, he was actually inside at the SEC.

据我所知，他在执法部门待过，这让他成了加密货币方面的专家。

He was in the enforcement division as I understand, which makes him an expert on crypto.

所以如果你觉得不错，记得点赞和订阅。

So if that sounds good to you, make sure you like and subscribe.

把这期节目分享给会喜欢的人吧。

Share this episode with somebody who's going to enjoy it.

提醒一下，我们今天的播客是免费的，这要感谢我们的优秀赞助商Nexo，一个让你在一个地方就能交易、赚取和借贷的数字资产平台。

And as a reminder, our podcast today is free, and that would not be possible without our wonderful sponsors at Nexo, the digital asset platform that lets you trade, earn, and borrow all in one place.

稍后在节目中会有更多关于他们的信息，请留意。

Keep an ear out for more information on them later in the episode.

但现在，欢迎来到Milk Road节目。

But for now, welcome to the Milk Road show.

Ashley，先生，你今天怎么样？

Ashley, sir, how are you today?

我很好。

I'm great.

谢谢你，约翰。

Thanks, John.

很高兴和你在一起。

Great to be here with you.

非常感谢你邀请我来。

Thanks so much for having me on.

我很高兴和你聊天。

I'm glad to talk to you.

我想和一位对美国证券交易委员会有内部消息或者至少有一些经验的人聊聊，不是消息，而是经验。

I I wanted to speak with somebody who had some inside information on or at least some experience, not information, but some experience with the SEC.

《清晰法案》今天失败了。

The CLARITY Act has failed today.

你对来自华盛顿的这条消息有什么反应？既然这项法案似乎最终被否决了，你觉得我们接下来会走向何方？

What's your reaction to this news out of Washington, and sort of where do you see us going from here now that the bill seems to finally have been killed?

我觉得

I think

你知道，CLARITY法案在今年下半年看起来越来越没戏了。

CLARITY for, you know, the second half of this year has looked increasingly doubtful.

随着时间推移，就像之前《天才法案》那样，你开始经历那种反复的等待——上半年没通过。

As we got farther and farther into the year, you start doing the dance that was done a few times over with Genius Act of you don't get it in the first six months of the year.

然后你就想，好吧，也许八月休会前能过，结果也没成。

And you say, all right, well, maybe before the August recess, that doesn't happen.

那也没关系。

Then it's okay.

也许秋天，你知道，中期选举之前能过。

Well, maybe in the fall, you know, before before midterms.

但问题是，大家秋天回来的时候。

But the problem is people come back in the fall.

如果你是民选官员，正在竞选连任，就算你自己不选，但立法机构里很多人都在选，那就会吸引大量必要的关注，而这些人是推动CLARITY法案前进所必需的。

And if you're an elected official and you're running for reelection, even if you're not, if so many in your legislature are, that's gonna draw a lot of necessary attention of all those folks who would be needed to drive CLARITY forward.

如果到那时又失败了，那就只能等到跛脚鸭时期了。

And then if it fails again there, then you've got the lame duck.

所以《天才法案》也是这么折腾了好几年，最后才获得势头通过并成为法律。

So this happened for a few years with Genius before finally it got the momentum to be passed and to become law.

所以我不认为这些条款就再也见不到了。

So this I don't view this as we'll never see these provisions again.

我们不会再看到《清晰法案》了。

We'll never see CLARITY again.

我觉得这一轮今年可能不成功，但我预计它会重新被提出。

I view this as this round may be unsuccessful this year, but I would expect that it would be reintroduced.

我的意思是，尤其是《清晰法案》的主要条款，可能会在新的一年新会期重新提出。

I mean, especially or something with the major provisions that CLARITY would be reintroduced in in the new session in the new year.

好的。

Okay.

所以某个版本可能还会再回来。

So another version of this may come back at some point.

我们来谈谈监管方面，而不是立法方面。

Let's talk about, the regulatory side of this as opposed to the legislative side.

美国证券交易委员会和商品期货交易委员会一直在开展一个名为“加密项目”的联合行动，试图为行业提供一些监管指导。

The SEC and the CFTC have been doing a joint initiative called Project Crypto to try to give some regulatory guidance to the industry.

很多人预计他们会加紧行动，因为现在这项法案似乎暂时搁浅了。

A lot of people are expecting them to sort of step up now that the the bill seems to be dead for the moment.

你对此有什么看法？

What are your thoughts on this?

在这次投票之后，你预计会从这些机构听到什么消息？

What are you expecting to hear from these agencies in the aftermath of this vote?

而且，你觉得监管方面接下来的步骤是什么？

And, you know, what do you think are the next steps here from the regulatory side?

我认为你已经看到市场监管机构，也就是美国证券交易委员会和商品期货交易委员会，正如你所说，正在采取措施，实施那些不需要《清晰法案》就能推行的监管措施。

I think you saw already saw the market regulators, the SEC and the CFTC, you know, to your point, making moves to take regulatory measures that for which they did not need CLARITY, the CLARITY Act.

所以，我预计这种情况会继续，甚至会更加激烈，因为我觉得这两个机构都有非常有远见的领导层，而且他们希望提供很多《清晰法案》本来会提供的清晰度，但这是通过立法措施来实现的，这很难，因为没有比“清晰”更好的词了。

So, I would just expect that to continue and to intensify even because I think you've got very forward thinking leadership at both agencies and you've got leadership at both agencies that wants to provide a lot of the, it's hard because there's just no better word than CLARITY, a lot of the CLARITY that the CLARITY Act would have provided, but in terms of legislative measures.

所以我觉得他们会继续在不需要额外立法的情况下做他们能做的事，并且推动认定这些资产属于他们监管职责范围内，依据他们的授权法规，然后围绕这些资产制定规则，落实那些如果CLARITY法案生效你会看到的各项条款。

So I think I would expect to see them continue to do what they can do without needing any additional legislation and push for finding that these assets are within their regulatory mandate from their authorizing statutes and that they're gonna rule make around them to put in place various of the provisions that you would have seen if CLARITY had had been effective.

问题就在于，如果有立法的话，他们本来需要制定规则来实施那项立法。

It's just a question of, you know, if there had been legislation, they would have had to rule make to implement that legislation.

现在没有立法，他们就在通过制定规则来填补这个空白。

Now in the absence of legislation, they're rule making to fill that gap.

嘿，大家好。

Hey, guys.

我是LG，插播一下，告诉大家约翰前几天和传奇人物Raul Powell做了一次精彩的访谈。

It's LG jumping in here to let you know about an incredible interview that John did the other day with the legendary Raul Powell.

这个访谈在9月15日上线了，他们聊了为什么加密货币今年表现不佳，需要发生什么才能让它最终上涨，以及为什么Raul认为加密货币可能成为整个AI经济的金融基础设施。

It dropped on September 15, and they got into why crypto has struggled this year, what needs to happen for it to finally move, and why Raul thinks crypto could become the financial infrastructure for the entire AI economy.

他们还聊到了Raul自己在这个周期里是怎么投资的。

They also got into how Raul himself is actually investing for the cycle.

我们还为这次访谈录制了一期Milk Road PRO的盘后节目，就是我们在访谈结束后坐下来聊聊我们如何在自己的投资组合中体现REL的一些观点。

We also recorded a Milk Road PRO after hours for this one, which is where we sit down after the fact to talk about how we're expressing some of RELs views in our own portfolios.

所以去你的播客订阅里找这期节目，然后点下面的链接去Milk Road Pro看独家加长版。

So check your pod feed for the episode and head over to Milk Road Pro for the exclusive after hours at the link below.

你希望他们怎么填补这个空白？

What do you want to see from them in terms of filling that gap?

换句话说，那些立法里可能不会通过的内容，你希望监管机构优先处理哪些？你最优先考虑的是什么？

In other words, what are some of these pieces from the legislation that maybe isn't gonna go through now that you would like to see prioritized from the regulators and, yeah, what would be the top of your priority list there?

首先，各机构可以在各自的权限划分上达成更明确、更具体的共识。

First, the agencies could agree on a more specific and delineated division between their various authorities.

我觉得如果你是律师，这些界限会稍微清楚一些。

I mean, I think if you're a lawyer, it is a little more clear where those lines fall.

但你知道，很多人对这个领域的监管抱怨是，我不需要成为律师才能读懂和理解怎么做。

But, you know, I think a lot of the complaints with regulation in this space is I shouldn't have to be a lawyer to be able to read and understand, you know, what how you need to do this.

其实，创业本来就会涉及一定的法律成本。

Mean, there are going to be a certain number of legal costs that are involved with starting up a business anyways.

但为了判断我作为创业者，这到底是不是一门可行的生意？

But in order to discern whether or not I'm an entrepreneur, is this even a viable business?

这件事我能按我想要的方式去做吗？

Is this something I can do in the way I want to do it?

如果能多一点确定性就好了，比如，我觉得我可以做，因为那个监管条款告诉我，我会归SEC管。

It would be helpful to have a little more certainty around, yes, I think I can do it because that regulatory provision tells me I'll be under the SEC.

所以归SEC管的话，我知道那些监管措施是什么样的，或者归CFTC管，不管是什么。

And so under the SEC, I know what those regulatory measures look like or under the CFTC, whatever it is.

所以我觉得这可能是其中之一。

So I think that's probably one of the things.

然后我觉得还有一些关于软件工程师、验证者和其他人的保护性条款，这些人我觉得并不是拒绝在这个领域活跃，但一直有些担心，如果这里没有明确的目标，出了问题，我会不会从监管角度或其他方面成为被追责的人？

And then I think some of the protective provisions around software engineers and validators and others who I don't think have refused to be active in this space, but have always had some concern of if there's not an obvious target and something goes wrong here, am I gonna be the one on the hook for this from a regulatory perspective or otherwise?

所以，通过监管来稍微澄清一下这一点会有帮助。

So, think clarifying that a little bit by regulation would be helpful.

而且我觉得在当前环境下，这一点变得更加紧迫，因为你不希望那些本来要为这个行业建设基础设施、在这个行业里设立实体的人突然说，风险太大了。

And I think that that only gets a little more urgent in this current environment because you don't want people who would be sort of building the infrastructure for this industry and standing up entities in this industry to suddenly say, you know, there there's too much risk.

我要退一步。

I'm gonna step back.

你觉得风险有多大？比如说，SEC 出台一些法规，CFTC 也出台一些法规。

How much risk do you think there is from a perspective of, say, like, the SEC rolls out some regulation, the CFTC rolls out some regulation.

也许将来会有不同的国会、不同的总统，对行业不那么友好。

Maybe in the future, we get a different congress, a different president that are less friendly to the industry.

在美国，一旦这些法规颁布到市场上，它们被真正撤销的风险有多大？相比之下，这些监管机构实际上有多大的持久力？

How much risk is there of them actually rolling back regulations once they're promulgated into the market in The United States versus, like, how much actual staying power do some of these regulatory bodies actually have?

你对这个局面怎么看？

And what's what's your, like, read of that landscape?

嗯，这就是

Well, that's one of the

立法的价值之一在于它更有持久性。

values of legislation is it has more permanence.

我的意思是，它也可以被废除。

I mean, it it can be undone also.

只是看废除的难度有多大。

It's just a question of how difficult is it to undo it.

你知道，如果现在国会通过了一项法案，而且，你提到的那个问题，我猜是说某个政党能够在立法机构中推进并翻转国会，那可能更容易，不一定是更容易，说起来容易做起来难，这就是政治。

You know, if you get something passed by congress now and the, you know, the problem I guess you're talking about the Party is able to advance in the legislature and flip Congress, that probably easier, not probably, easier said than done, it's politics.

从某种程度上说，这就像转动一艘航空母舰，要推动那里的变革很难。

It's turning an aircraft carrier in some ways to get movements made there.

但你必须经历这个过程。

But you've got to go through that process.

你必须改变政治格局，才能想要推翻几年前刚刚完成的事情。

You've got to change the political complexion to want to undo what was just done, you know, a few years ago.

然后，假设你做到了，你还得起草法案。

Then, you know, assuming you do that, you've gotta draft legislation.

你得为这个法案争取支持。

You've gotta get support for that legislation.

你得经历一个漫长的政治过程。

You got to go through a whole long political process.

监管过程，你知道，这是一把双刃剑，实施监管措施作为规则更容易也更快捷，因为基本上就是你起草一个规则，发布征求意见，然后处理意见，最后实施你要实施的内容。

The regulatory process, you know, and it's a double edged sword, is easier and quicker to implement regulatory measures as as rules because it's really just you draft a rule, you put it out for comment and then process the comments and you end up enacting what you're going to enact.

不管推出什么，可能都会面临一些诉讼。

There's probably gonna be some litigation against whatever you put out.

这就是这类事情的常态，但至少会有一条规则。

It's just the nature of how these things go, but you would have a rule.

但这样解释起来，比我解释立法要快得多。

But that is a lot quicker explanation than my explanation of legislation.

但问题或风险在于，后续的政府，不管是什么机构，只要当初发布了那条规则，他们上台后可以做同样的事情，把你之前通过新规敲响的钟再敲回去。

And the problem or the risk is that the subsequent administration at whatever the agency is that put out that rule can come into office and do the exact same thing and unring the bell that you rang however long ago with that new regulation.

你明白吗？

You know?

所以，这真的只是看它有多持久，以及被推翻有多容易的问题。

So it's it's really just a matter of how much staying power does it have in terms of how easy is it to undo.

好的。

Okay.

所以，这会有帮助，而且改变起来会很难，但也不是不可能。

So it's it's something that'll help and it'll be difficult to change, but not impossible.

而立法会是市场更强大的支撑，或者说更坚实的基础。

And legislation would be a stronger a stronger vote for the market or a stronger bedrock for the market to build on rather.

我想听听你对最近SEC关于过户代理规则更新的看法。

I wanted to ask your thoughts on something that we saw recently out of the SEC around updates to the transfer agent rules.

这些规则好像快四十年没更新了，甚至更久。

These are rules that haven't been updated in, I think, almost forty years, not longer.

对。

Yep.

看起来他们是想通过这些修改和更新，专门为代币化、代币化资产以及过户代理转移这些资产提供更多支持。

And it seems like they're trying to make these changes and updates to this specifically to allow for more things involving tokenization, tokenized assets, and and transfer agents moving those around.

你怎么看这个？

What's your read on this?

这会解锁什么？对数字资产行业和整个代币化来说，这个变化有多大？

What does this unlock and how big of a change would this be for the digital assets industry and for tokenization overall?

这会是一个重大的变化。

It would be a substantial change.

基本上就是说，区块链本身就是一个账本。

It would be basically, you would have the blockchain is a ledger, fundamentally speaking.

这样一来，就能首次让这个账本成为记录交易和加密资产的权威账本。

And so it would allow that ledger to, for the first time, be the authoritative ledger on which transactions and crypto assets are recorded.

你最初会看到这体现在链上发行的证券之类的。

You're seeing that initially in the context of securities issued on chain and that kind of thing.

我的意思是，既然是在SEC的框架下，这些都会以某种形式被视为证券。

I mean, it's all gonna be You're in the SEC context, so they're all gonna be securities in some way.

不过我说证券的时候，就是指这类东西。

But I guess when I say securities, I mean, and that kind of thing.

你知道，这会彻底改变这个行业的格局，而正如你所说，这个行业在SEC监管的实体中一直是个比较冷门的角落，但也许以后就不再是这样了。

You know, it would seismically change the complexion of an industry, which to your point has been a sleepier corner of, the SEC regulated entity space, but, you know, perhaps no more.

你能多跟我们讲讲你现在的职位和TX是什么吗？

Could you tell us a little bit more about your current role and what TX is?

因为你从在SEC内部工作，到在CRX期间为很多加密公司辩护，现在又在TX这个平台上做开发，这转变挺大的。

Because you went from, you know, being inside at the SEC to defending a lot of crypto companies during your time at CRX, and now you're building things and working with a platform called TX.

但请用通俗的话给我们讲讲这是什么。

But walk us through in plain English what this is.

Soligentic 和 Corium 的这次合并是怎么回事？

What was this merger of Soligentic and Corium?

这会带来什么新的可能性？

What does that unlock?

还有，给我们一些背景信息吧。

And, you know, give us some some context for this.

你刚才说

When you said

我之前为加密货币公司辩护，先是在一家叫 Brian Cave 的律所领导加密货币业务，干了大概三年，然后去了 Xerox。

I was defending crypto companies that I was I was I first led the crypto practice at a at a law firm called called Brian Cave for three years or so, and then I went to to Xerox.

所以我在 Brian Cave 辩护的客户比在 ZeroX 多。

So I was defending more people at Brian Cave than at at ZeroX.

但是

But

你在为正当的身份能力而战。

You're fighting the good identity capacity.

对，是的。

And and yeah.

没错。

Exactly.

我当时，你知道，我对实体是中立的。

I was, you know, it was I was I was entity agnostic.

但TX，我认识这个团队或者背后的团队已经有一段时间了。

But TX, I had known the team for a while or the team behind it.

这些是前身实体，他们联系了我，对资产代币化非常感兴趣，认为这是一个早就该发生的运动。

And these were the predecessor entities and they reached out and were very interested in asset tokenization and thought that that was you know, a movement that was overdue.

我同意。

And I agreed.

我的意思是，我一直认为，加密货币市场和传统金融之间的联系越多，用例就越多，流动性也就越强。

I mean, I have always thought that the more connections you can make between crypto markets and traditional finance, The more use cases you have, the more liquidity it creates.

所以，你知道，我当时很感兴趣，一年多前就加入了他们，负责牵头这个项目，把各个实体搭建起来，和受监管的实体合作推进股票代币化，还有其他方面，包括一个我们正在搭建的代币化资产交易平台，目的是减少过去资产代币化行业里那种各自为政的情况。以前你可能得这样：想交易和代币化房地产，得找这个实体；

So, you know, I I was interested and ended up joining them a little more than a year ago as to lead this effort and get the entities stood up and work on stock tokenization alongside regulated entities and other aspects, including a marketplace for tokenized assets that we're trying to that that we're standing up to reduce a lot of the siloing that has occurred in the asset tokenization industry in the past where you might know, oh, I can go to this entity if I want to transact and tokenize real estate.

想交易和代币化知识产权，得找那个实体；想搞代币化大宗商品，又得找另一个实体，诸如此类。

I can go to that entity if I wanna transact and tokenize intellectual property rights, another entity for tokenized commodities, that kind of thing.

但每个平台都有自己的流动性，彼此之间没法互通。

But each of those had their own liquidity, none of which was sort of interchangeable.

所以TX的目标就是提供TX应用，覆盖所有资产类别。

So the goal of TX is to provide the TX app, which spans every asset class.

实际上，我们只是技术层，是一个中立的接口，让人们通过它接触到受监管的机构，然后在这些机构那里交易各种资产类别。

Really, we're just the technology layer, the neutral interface through which people reach regulated parties with whom they can transact in all of these various asset classes.

这就是我们想搬到链上的东西。

And that was what we wanted to bring on chain.

你之前提到了智能代币。

You referenced smart tokens earlier.

那正是吸引我加入TX的原因之一，因为智能代币把通常只能在智能合约层面实现的功能直接内置到代币本身，比如白名单、黑名单、冻结、追回等等。

That was part of what got me interested in TX because the smart token builds functionality into the token itself that you would usually see at the smart contract level, such as white listing, black listing, freezing, clawbacks, that kind of thing.

我觉得这样的功能，随着加密货币资产的用户群扩大、发行这些资产的机构越来越多，以及允许这些资产交易的地域范围越来越广，变得极其重要。因为你知道，我们跟监管机构、交易对手方都见过面，他们常常会说，我甚至不知道你还能做到这个，你知道吗？

And I think that functionality like that as you're expanding the user base for crypto assets and the universe of entities issuing crypto assets and the geographies in which these assets are permitted is immensely important because, you know, we met with regulators, we've met with counterparties and that functionality that I didn't even know you could do that, You know?

所以，能在代币层面就把所有这些功能都编程进去，这真的让我觉得是革命性的。

And so the ability to have all of that programmed in at the token level really struck me as transformative.

明白了。

Gotcha.

好的。

Okay.

所以这里确实有一些重要的东西正在被解锁。

So there's some things that are being unlocked here that are important.

你能跟我谈谈你对行业进行代币化的正确和错误方式的看法吗？从TX的角度来看，这又是怎样的？

Could you talk to me about your thoughts on the right and wrong way for the industry to go about tokenization and what the view of that looks like from TX?

因为最近Robinhood链受到了很多关注，他们做的事情，但AMC的CEO称之为卑鄙，似乎每个人都在从不同的角度争论这件事。

Because there's been a lot of attention on Robinhood chain, what they're doing, but the AMC CEO called it vile, and it seems like everyone's debating this from different angles.

你对此有什么看法？

What's your perspective on this?

你希望这里发生什么样的事情？

What would you like to see happening here?

我

I

对整个行业以及整个金融行业，实际上美国金融行业，我的看法是，透明度是带来最大流动性、吸引最多用户和发行者的关键。

don't have a strong view beyond the entire premise of all of this industry and of of financial industry generally, and actually The US financial industry has been transparency is what breeds the greatest liquidity, is what attracts the most users and the most issuers.

因为归根结底，透明的市场是你可以信任的，用户、购买者和发行者都能信任，因为每个人都能看到其他人在做什么。

Because at the end of the day, a transparent market is one that you can trust and that users can trust and that purchasers can trust and issuers because everyone can see everything everyone else is doing.

我不想说这是彻底的透明，但我的意思是，SEC 基本上是一个信息监管机构，规定你必须提供什么信息，必须知道什么信息，不能知道什么，诸如此类。

I don't wanna say it's radical transparency, but I mean, the SEC is a regulator of information on a basic level of what information you have to provide, what information do you have to know, what can you not know, like that kind of thing.

所以，我认为将披露和透明度作为资产代币化的支柱至关重要。

So, I think that having disclosure and transparency as pillars of asset tokenization is critical.

在美国，这些资产是证券，所以这种透明度是伴随资产而来的。

And in The United States, these assets are securities, so that transparency comes with the asset.

在国外，情况可能会有所不同。

Abroad, things can look different.

在美国，情况可能会有所不同。

In The United States, things can look different.

但只要这种透明度得到尊重，那么购买者就应该获得关于他们所购买产品的完整信息。

But as long as that transparency is being honored, then there should be full information for purchasers as to what they're getting.

如果他们得到的代币表明这是AMC的股份，并且持有它，你就是AMC的股东。

If they're getting a token that says this is a share of AMC, and if you hold it, you're a shareholder of AMC.

这不同于一个追踪AMC价格的代币。

That's a different thing than this is a token that tracks the price of AMC.

如果你买了它，你可以把它放在你的数字钱包里，看到价格上下波动，但你没有任何股东权利之类的。

And if you buy it, you can put it in your digital wallet and see the price move up and down, but you don't have any shareholder rights or anything.

这些是不同的，但这些都是市场有需求的资产。

Those are different, but those are both assets for which the market has an appetite.

我认为这已经证明了。

I think it's shown that.

所以我不认为其中一个必然是对的或错的。

So I don't think that one is right or wrong necessarily.

我觉得，你知道，每种都有各自的用户群体感兴趣。

I think that you know, each has has a user base who's interested in it.

好的。

Okay.

所以，我觉得这是一个很有帮助的视角，说明这是一个大市场。

So that's, I think, a helpful perspective that it's a big market.

人们想要不同类型的敞口，不同类型的产品，而且，你知道，市场可以弄清楚他们想要哪些，哪些能找到产品市场契合。

People want different kinds of exposure, different kinds of products, and and, you know, the market can figure out what which ones they want and which ones find product market fit.

从你的角度来看，是的。

From your perspective Yeah.

我，那个，那个，抱歉。

I that's that's sorry.

哦，抱歉。

Oh, sorry.

请继续。

Go ahead.

我刚想说，就是说，那个……

I was just gonna say, I mean, that's that's

这是自由市场的观点。

a free market perspective.

我的意思是，有些人可能更倾向于保护主义的看法，就是说，不行。

I mean, some people you can have a more protectionist viewpoint of, you know, no.

比如，不应该允许人们买这些东西，因为它们名字里有股票代码，还提到公司，人们会被误导或者搞混什么的。

Like, people shouldn't be allowed to buy these things because they have stock in the name and they have a reference to the company and people are gonna get misled or confused or whatever.

是的，我理解那种观点。

Yes, I mean, I understand that perspective.

我觉得美国金融市场的历史表明，在发行方面给予更大的自由。

I think the history of The US financial markets has been that greater liberty with what you issue.

然后如果出现问题，更多是在后端处理，比如执法之类的。

And then if there are problems with it, that's addressed more on the back end of, you know, enforcement, that kind of thing.

你知道，这种方法到目前为止被证明是最稳健的。

You know, that's the approach that has proven, most robust so far.

你知道吗，加密货币有个奇怪的地方，就是你在里面待得越久，账户好像就越多。

You know, one of the weird things about crypto is that the longer you're in it, the more accounts you seem to end up with.

你在一个地方买，在另一个地方交易，在别的地方赚收益，如果真的需要资金，最后往往得卖掉你本来想留的东西。

You buy in one place, trade somewhere else, earn yield somewhere else, and if you actually need capital, you end up having to sell something that you probably wanted to keep.

这就是为什么我们Milk Road和Nexo合作。

That's why we at Milk Road are partnering with Nexo.

他们能把所有东西都放在一个账户里。

These guys keep the whole thing under one account.

你可以买卖加密货币，在你已有的资产上赚利息，甚至可以用你的资金做抵押借款，而不必卖掉它。

You can buy, trade crypto, earn interest on what you already hold, and even borrow against your capital without having to sell it.

一个地方搞定，一个账户搞定，全在Nexo上。

All in one spot, all in one account, all on Nexo.

所以如果你需要流动性，但不想放弃你的持仓，或者你已经持有加密货币，想让它发挥更多作用，我觉得Nexo值得你花时间看看。

So if you need liquidity but you don't wanna give up your position or you're already holding crypto and you wanna be able to do more with it, I think Nexo is worth your time.

我们很喜欢和他们合作。

We love working with them.

我觉得你也会喜欢的。

I think you will too.

告诉他们，是Milk Road推荐你来的。

Tell them Milk Road sent you.

谢谢你的分享。

Appreciate the thoughts on that.

你觉得目前监管或立法对代币化整体来说，算是一个多大的障碍，或者说瓶颈？

How big of a hurdle or, let's say, maybe a bottleneck do you think regulation or legislation is right now to tokenization overall?

比如，这是不是给TX带来了很多麻烦，你希望在这方面得到一些帮助？

Like, is this a thing that is causing a lot of friction at TX that you would like to to see some help with?

还是说，这件事虽然需要解决，但现在并没有真正卡住进展？

Is this something that needs to come, but it's not really, like, putting a choke point on things right now?

你是怎么看的，你的观点是什么？

Like, how do you see that, and what's your perspective there?

这不算什么大障碍。

It's not a huge barrier.

我觉得我们现在做的，以及其他人做过的类似版本，都是市场有需求的产品。

I think what we're doing and what some others have done versions of is our products for which there's an appetite.

但我也确实认为，就像我们一开始聊到的，对于那些想创业、想知道自己能做什么的人来说，如果没有——我得再说一遍——

But I do think, as we talked about at the outset, that for folks who are looking to start businesses and want to know what they can do, not having the I'm going to have to say it again.

《清晰法案》能提供的，可能会让一些人望而却步。

The CLARITY Act would provide can forestall some people.

我的意思是，我觉得可以这样看：它不一定会阻碍TX想做的任何事情，这不是因为我听起来像是在邀功，而是因为我的证券背景。

I mean, I guess the way I would look at it is it's not necessarily going to block anything that TX is trying to do, that's because I don't want to sound like I'm taking too much credit, but that's because my securities background.

你知道，我懂这些东西。

Like, you know, I I know this stuff.

我干这行很久了。

I've been doing it for a long time.

但是，你知道，一个创始人不应该非得有这种背景才能把一个有用的想法落地。

But, you know, a founder should not have to have that background to be able to get a useful idea off the ground.

而且，你知道，我觉得这正是它的价值所在。

And, you know, I think that that's where its value comes in.

所以，我不会说这对整个行业是个阻碍，但可能有一批创始人的想法因为缺乏立法而被压制了。

So, I wouldn't say it's a blocker for the industry as a whole, but there's probably a set of founders' ideas that are being stymied by the lack of legislation.

所以我们想成为这个领域的领导者，并且尽可能多地解锁这个领域的活动。

And so we wanna be the leader in this area and we wanna unlock as much activity in this area as we can.

如果你要这么做，那就必须让每个人都能前进，而不只是那些对这些事情了解很深的人。

And if you're gonna do that, then you've gotta have everyone able to move forward, not just people who, you know, are deep into these issues.

这还得是另一个目前有点受阻的领域。

It's gotta be that other area that is, a little bit stymied at present.

我觉得SEC特别关注试图给一些创新豁免，以帮助解决这个问题。

And I think that the SEC is particularly focused on trying to give some innovation exemptions to sort of help with that problem.

我想听听你对代币化和人工智能交叉点的看法，因为最近几位嘉宾都谈到了这个话题，并分享了他们如何为AI代理构建，以及他们认为代币化是一个刚刚开始的超级周期。

I wanna get your thoughts on the intersection of tokenization and artificial intelligence because several of our guests recently have talked about this and given some thoughts on how they're building for AI agents and how they think tokenization is like this super cycle that's just getting started.

从你在TX的角度来看，你对AI代理的崛起、代理经济以及这对你今天在TX设计和提供的产品有什么影响，考虑了多少？

From your perspective at TX, how much are you thinking about the rise of AI agents, the agentic economy, and how that impacts the the products that you're designing and offering at TX today?

我们假设AI代理将会与我们的产品互动。

We assume that AI agents are going to be interacting with our products.

我觉得，你知道，在当前这个科技周期阶段，这是必然的。

I think, you know, the I think that's a given where we are right now in the tech cycle.

但从法律角度来看，具体会是什么样子，那就是另一个问题了，因为我觉得我们还没有围绕这项技术制定出很多具体的法律要求。

But what exactly that looks like from a legal perspective is a little bit of a different question because I don't think we've built out a ton of specific legal mandates around that technology.

我们有关于FTC、CFTC等现有的规定，但未必有针对AI的具体规定。

We have existing mandates around the FTC, the CFTC, that sort of thing, but we don't necessarily have AI specific mandates.

所以，当这项技术不涉及金融工具之类的东西时，在能做什么和不能做什么的监管方面，可能就有些空白。

And so, where this technology is not interacting with financial instruments or something, there may be a little bit of a dearth in terms of guardrails on what can and can't be done.

我觉得这就是你现在看到的很多讨论。

I think that's a lot of the discussion you're seeing right now.

但从我们的角度来看，你必须假设AI代理会在不久的将来（如果不是现在的话）被用来交易你们的产品。

But from our perspective, you've got to assume that an AI agent is going to, be used, if not already, in the near future, to transact in your products.

你觉得从TX的角度来看，你们从SEC和CFTC那里得到了所需的一切，以便以合规的方式让AI代理使用这些产品吗？还是说你觉得还有更多工作要做，需要更多的明确性？

Do you think that from your perspective at TX that you have everything you need from the SEC and the CFTC in order to, you know, go about making these products, accessible to AI agents in a way that is compliant, or do you think that there is still more work that needs to be done and clarity?

抱歉又提到那个词，但确实需要更多的明确性。

Sorry to come back to that word again, but clarity that needs to be given there.

我觉得我们有足够的东西往前推进，但自主代理在金融交易中的角色是个悬而未决的问题，美国和其他国家其实还没真正开始回答。

I think we have what we need to move forward, but I think the role of autonomous agents in financial transactions is an open question that The US and other countries haven't really began to answer.

也许有些国家已经开始了，但我们没有针对这个的具体法律。

Maybe some others have, but we don't have specific law on that.

我们有委托代理法，那是很老的法律了，但大概他们会用类似的东西。

We have principal agent law, which is pretty old law, but something like that is probably what they would use.

但我确实认为，不管那些更宏大、更根本的问题怎么发展——比如代理炸了一座城市之类的，这些最近被提出的末日情景——还有更具体的问题：如果代理在执行金融交易时做了某件事，出了事，谁来负责？

But I do think we're going to build out, regardless of what happens with the more seismic, bigger questions of what if an agent blows up a city or whatever it is, these sort of doomsday scenarios that have been floated in recent days, there's a lot more granular issue of if an agent does X while performing a financial transaction and something happens, who's on the hook?

怎么处理这种情况？

And how do you address that?

不只是谁负责，而是，对，怎么处理？

Not even who's on the hook, but yeah, how do you address that?

如果有人受了损失，他们怎么从那个代理那里得到赔偿？

If someone's wronged, how did they recover from that agent?

或者如果代理亏了钱，而这钱属于代理背后的开发者，那这一切又该怎么运作？

Or if the agent loses money that belongs to the developer behind the agent, like how does that all work?

所以我觉得这些空白将来会被填补。

And so I think that there are gaps there that will be filled.

它们不会阻碍TX的进展，但我很期待看到这一切如何发展。

They're not impeding TX's progress, on moving forward, but I'll be interested to watch, watch that play out.

Ashley，这对加密货币来说算是一个重大打击，即使它可能不是致命的，我们也会在其他方面获得监管的明确性。

Ashley, this is kind of like a big headline marquee defeat for crypto even if it's, you know, maybe not existential, and we'll get regulatory clarity in other ways.

今天市场有点下跌。

The markets are down a little bit today.

对于那些想知道美国对代币化或数字资产的接纳是否会持续、停止或放缓的人，你会怎么说？

What would you say to people who are wondering, is this going to hold up or stop or slow down, like, the the embrace of tokenization or digital assets in The United States?

你觉得我们会继续推进，还是这只是一堵大墙或只是一个小减速带？

Do you think we continue on, or do you think this is, a major wall or just a little speed bump?

你会怎么看待这件事？

How would you frame this?

嗯，我会继续推进。

Well, I'll continue on.

加密货币会经历周期，这也是你看到的价格波动的一部分。

The crypto goes through cycles, and that's part of the price action you're seeing.

但显然，这是一项有势头支持的立法努力，但这次没有成功。

But obviously, this was a legislative effort that had momentum behind it and it was not successful in this instance.

我觉得最值得参考的例子是《天才法案》。

I think the most instructive scenario to look at is the Genius Act.

那个法案花了三年时间，我

That took three years, I

觉得，

think,

才通过，而且它经历了好几次这样的周期，最后才成为法律。

to pass and it went through this cycle several times before it finally became law.

所以，我不认为《清晰法案》第一年没通过就决定了它的条款最终会怎样，也不认为这是对整个加密行业的一个定论。

So, I don't view CLARITY's failure to be passed in this first year as at all determinative of what will happen with the provisions in CLARITY Act, you know, overall and then or on, you know, as some sort of coda on the on the crypto industry more generally.

我觉得，公平地说，加密行业内部对这件事是否可取也存在分歧。

I think it was some and and and to be fair, the result disagreement in the crypto industry of whether or not this was even, you know, something that was that desirable.

你知道，有些人真的很想要它，而另一些人则不想要。

You know, there were folks who really wanted it and there were others who didn't.

还有人会说，我不是特别喜欢它，但我认为有立法很重要。

And then there were folks who said, I don't really like it that much, but I think it's important to have legislation.

所以，我出于这个原因想要它。

So, I want it for that reason.

所以，不是每个人都会以同样的方式反应，但我也不认为这会削弱整个行业的势头。

So, not everyone will react the same way, but I also don't think it's it's at all a undercuts the momentum of the industry generally.

你觉得有没有可能——我听说过这种说法，我想听听你的看法。

Do you think that there's any I I've heard this suggested, and I wanna get your thoughts on this.

有些人说，与其试图在一个大法案中通过所有这些内容，不如现在有机会把《清晰法案》拆分成更小的部分，在过程中就不同事项进行妥协，也许能通过几个较小的法案，就像你说的，这些法案可能对整个行业来说总体上更好，因为它们会更细致、更有针对性。

Some people have said that rather than trying to pass all of these things in one big bill, that now maybe there's a chance to break the CLARITY Act down into smaller parts, compromise on different things along the way, and maybe get a few smaller bills through that, just like you said, might actually be overall net better for the industry because they would be a little more nuanced and specific.

你觉得这种情况有可能发生吗，还是说如果这个法案再次提出，它仍然会是一个大法案？

Do you think that's likely to happen, or do you think if this bill comes back, it will still be one, you know, big act?

我认为这取决于即将到来的中期选举会发生什么。

I think it depends on what happens in, the midterm elections upcoming.

我觉得这很大程度上取决于政客们觉得什么能通过。

And I would think it's a lot of what do politicians think can be passed.

如果他们决定，你知道吗，一个全面的法案当然好，但我们试过了，也看到了结果。

And if they decide, you know what, a comprehensive bill would be great, but we tried that and we saw what happened.

现在国会重组了，可能面貌会大不相同，或者只是不一样了，我们觉得全面法案不是正确的方向。

And now with a reconstituted Congress, may have a dramatically different complexion or just different, we don't think that the, the comprehensive bill is the way to go.

所以，是的，更零敲碎打的做法可能是他们选择的方式。

So, yeah, doing it more piecemeal may may be the way that that they choose.

但我的猜测是，这取决于政治上的可行性。

But I my guess is that would be dictated by what's politically possible.

Ashley，非常感谢你来做客，分享你对这些问题的看法。

Ashley, I really appreciate appreciate you coming on and giving some thoughts on all of this.

我知道你长期关注这个行业，以及它与立法和监管的交集，所以你的见解非常宝贵。

I I know you've been close to this industry and to its, let's say, touch points with legislation and regulation for a long time, so your wisdom is greatly appreciated.

感谢你来到Milk Road Crypto。

Thank you for being on Milk Road Crypto.

我们该让大家去哪里找到你和你的工作呢？

Where can we send people to find more of you and your work online?

可以在LinkedIn和Twitter上关注我，我一般在那里写东西。

Follow me on, on LinkedIn, on on Twitter, is where I tend to write.

和你聊天真的很愉快。

And, you know, it's been great being with you.

希望以后还能再见到你，大家也可以去那些平台找我。

So, you know, hopefully, I'll see you again, and, and this will be a place they can go to.

好的，希望我们以后还能再聊。

Well, I hope we can catch up later on.

希望到时候监管和立法方面的情况会更好。

I hope we'll be in in a better place from a regulatory and legislative perspective then.

Ashley，感谢你来做客。

Ashley, thanks for being here.

我真的很喜欢这次对话。

I really enjoyed the conversation.

感谢大家今天的参与。

Thank you all for joining us.

希望大家今天都有所收获。

I hope you all learned something today.

那么下次再见，保持安全，保持学习，保持乐观，我们下期Milk Road节目再见。

So until next time, stay safe, stay educated, stay bullish, and we will see you all on the next episode of the Milk Road show.

感谢各位的到来。

Thanks for being here, everyone.

再见。

Bye.

感谢收听Milk Road。

Thanks for listening to Milk Road.

如果你喜欢这期节目，记得点赞和订阅。

If you enjoyed the show, make sure you like and subscribe.

如果你在市场中难以找到赢家，那正是Milk Road PRO的用武之地。

And if you're struggling to find winners in the market, that's exactly what Milk Road PRO is built for.

我们的分析师很早就发现了一些最大的赢家，PRO让你看到他们接下来买什么，他们做的每一笔交易，以及每个仓位背后的研究。

Our analysts have called some of the biggest winners early, and PRO lets you see what they're buying next, every trade they make, and the research behind every position.

点击下方链接查看Milk Road PRO。

Check out Milk Road PRO at the link below.

你在Milk Road上听到的所有内容仅供参考。

Everything you hear on Milk Road is for informational purposes only.

这些是我们的个人观点，不是财务建议，我们可能持有我们谈论的一些投资。

These are our personal opinions, not financial advice, and we may own some of the investments we talk about.

一定要自己做研究，做出适合自己的决定。

Always do your own research and make the decisions that are right for

你。

you.

下次见。

See you next time.