Byron Gilliam

This is a segment from The Breakdown newsletter. To read full editions, <a href="https://blockworks.co/brand/the-breakdown" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">subscribe</a>.



<hr class="wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity"/>



<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
“It is essential for human flourishing that we conduct substantial parts of our lives unobserved.”



— Tiffany Jenkins
</blockquote>



Hallways were the first privacy tech.



In 1716, the Duchess of Marlborough questioned the architect designing Blenheim Palace because of all the long, narrow rooms he had planned. The architect had to explain that these were “no more than a passage” between rooms.



Another contemporary builder articulated the purpose of this revolutionary new design:&nbsp; “All the Rooms in this House are private; that is, there is a Way into each of them without passing through any other Room.”



In other words, hallways created privacy.&nbsp;



“It took a century for this architectural feature to become commonplace,” Tiffany Jenkins writes in <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Strangers-Intimates-Rise-Fall-Private/dp/1529034167">Strangers and Intimates; the Rise and Fall of Private Life</a>. “But once it did, the Victorians embraced it wholeheartedly.”



Before the time of hallways, “there was no strictly separate private sphere, no aspect of life where others could not legitimately intrude,” she explains. “The outside world could pry into anyone’s business and was expected to do so. Curiosity and nosiness were mandated.”



Counterintuitively, that began to change with the Puritans, whose insistence that matters of religion and conscience were private freedoms established the first barrier the state could not cross.



Once established, this zone of non-interference expanded into a Victorian definition of privacy that protected bedrooms, communications and commerce.&nbsp;



In 1844, the privacy zone was tested when the British government was caught opening the letters of the political exile Giuseppe Mazzini to snoop on his correspondence with Italian revolutionaries.&nbsp;



Mazzini proved the surveillance by having friends mail him grains of sand and poppy seeds. When the letters arrived otherwise empty — the grains having fallen out during the government’s clumsy inspection — the breach of privacy sparked national outrage.



Thomas Carlyle called opening a man’s letters a “scoundrelism” equivalent to picking his pocket.



Radical MP Thomas Duncombe said the practice was “subversive of the public confidence essential to a commercial country.”



Most tellingly, the plots of two Charles Dickens novels — Bleak House and Little Dorrit — revolved around stolen letters that threatened to expose family connections and economic dealings.



All of which confirmed, as Tiffany Jenkins says, that “a revolution in the value and esteem of privacy had taken place.”



But while Victorians were the first to embrace this cultural ideal, the United States was the first to write it into law — sort of.



In 1890, Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis published <a href="https://www.brandeis.edu/library/archives/exhibits/ldb-100/career/privacy.shtml">The Right to Privacy</a> — a foundational article arguing for a fundamental &#8220;right to be let alone&#8221; that was written in response to the privacy intrusions of newspapers and early photography.



This was a &#8220;seminal moment&#8221; in the history of privacy, Jenkins writes. But, in researching their article, the two lawyers observed a surprising gap: There is no mention of privacy in the Constitution — not even in the Amendments.



Despite the influence of the article, the constitutional silence on privacy persisted for decades.



In 1928, the Supreme Court upheld the government’s use of warrantless wiretaps in Olmstead v the United States, which ruled that wiretapping did not violate the Fourth Amendment (because there was no physical trespass onto the defendant&#8217;s property).&nbsp;



Writing on behalf of the four dissenting justices, Justice Brandeis warned that “the progress of science in furnishing the Government with means of espionage is not likely to stop with wiretapping. Ways may someday be developed by which the Government, without removing papers from secret drawers, can reproduce them in court, and by which it will be enabled to expose to a jury the most intimate occurrences of the home.”



Exactly that has happened, of course.&nbsp;



(Less prophetically, Brandeis also warned that “advances in the psychic and related sciences may bring means of exploring unexpressed beliefs, thoughts and emotions.”)



It was not until Griswold v Connecticut in 1965 that the Supreme Court asserted a constitutional right to privacy. And even then it took some creative logic.&nbsp;



“To rule that privacy is a constitutional right,” Jenkins writes, “Justice Douglas argued that the Bill of Rights’ specific guarantees have ‘penumbras’ which, when drawn together, add up to a de facto right to privacy.” Penumbras — a concept that sounds more astronomical than legal — seems like a precarious legal foundation for privacy.



In 1967, the right to privacy got a little more concrete when the Supreme Court ruled in Katz v the United States that the Fourth Amendment protected not just places, but people, too.



This was celebrated by privacy advocates because it decoupled privacy rights from property rights, ensuring that the Fourth Amendment applied in places like the telephone booth where Charles Katz was illegally betting on college basketball.



In hindsight, though, the celebrations look misplaced because the court simply required that the government get a warrant for its eavesdropping.&nbsp;



“The ruling actually normalized wiretapping surveillance as a tool of law and order,” Jenkins writes.



For privacy advocates, things have only gone downhill from there.



“Through a series of rulings,” Jenkins writes, “the Supreme Court narrowed the definition of prohibited searches while broadening the scope of permissible searches and warrants. As a result, constitutional protections for privacy were progressively undermined.”



To illustrate just how undermined, Jenkins cites the case of Monica Lewinsky, who was forced to surrender her private correspondence, gifts, and clothing simply because her infamous correspondent was accused of a crime (and not even a big one).



With the government granting itself that kind of subpoena power, privacy is no longer a locked door at the end of a hallway — instead, it’s just a paperwork requirement.



Jenkins laments this.



“It’s essential to have a private space shielded from corporate, state and public scrutiny,” she concludes; “a place where we can be alone.”



But her history of privacy demonstrates that, contrary to popular belief, “it’s neither ‘natural’ nor universal to have a private life.”



So if we want one, we’ll have to build it.



<hr class="wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity"/>



Get the news in your inbox. Explore Blockworks newsletters:



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li><a href="https://blockworks.co/newsletter/the-breakdown">The Breakdown</a>: Decoding crypto and the markets. Daily.</li>



<li><a href="https://blockworks.co/newsletter/0xresearch">0xResearch</a>: Alpha in your inbox. Think like an analyst. </li>
</ul>

Cybersecurity

Privacy is not a ‘natural’ right — it’s an invention

Bessie Liu

Jack Kubinec

<div id="highlights-block_635c1af1eaf96" class="highlights">
 <ul>
 <li>Proper legal frameworks need to be developed to protect individual members of DAOs for being personally liable for actions and obligations</li>
 <li>Wyoming’s laws do not take into account the uniqueness of DAOs, crypto-focused attorney says</li>
 </ul>
 
</div>



Despite the push in select US states to become more appealing to DAOs, blockchain protocols and assorted decentralized collectives are still often opting to incorporate in traditional tax havens.



The trend has something to do with definitions: DAOs (<a href="https://cms.blockworks.co/the-investors-guide-to-daos/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">decentralized autonomous organizations</a>) are fairly well-understood in crypto circles. That definition, however, does not hold water with the SEC or state-regulators who are sure what to make of DAOs: from how they’re structured to what taxes they may owe.



DAOs, primarily, are a group of individuals who use blockchain tech and on-chain voting mechanisms to make business decisions.&nbsp;



Most commonly deployed in decentralized finance (DeFi) governance today, the emergence of DAOs has raised legal concerns around the world.



In the US, select states have made bold attempts at creating corporate structures that provide legal protection for those participating in DAO endeavors.&nbsp;



Among them is <a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://cms.blockworks.co/pro-crypto-wyoming-not-yet-pro-enough-to-attract-bitcoin-miners/&amp;sa=D&amp;source=docs&amp;ust=1666985534481409&amp;usg=AOvVaw1Npe_YXUFEmJULhu0Df96s" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Wyoming</a>, the first to legalize DAO LLCs — meaning traditional legal protections for LLC members were extended to any individuals that participated in DAO activities.



Delaware, too, has attracted attention from DAOs for its flexible LLC laws that would protect individual members of the DAO for being personally liable for any actions and obligations.



Brian Frye, a law professor at the University of Kentucky, told Blockworks that “Delaware is kind of the center of gravity of the corporate form in the United States, because Delaware as a jurisdiction figured out what was attractive to corporations.”



Even so, many organizations are still opting to incorporate overseas. Most recently, SushiDAO, the governing body of decentralized crypto exchange SushiSwap, made the decision to <a href="https://cms.blockworks.co/sushidao-seeks-shelter-in-cayman-islands-panama/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">set up a new legal structure</a> in the Cayman Islands and Panama.&nbsp;



Neil Bhasin, a SushiDAO community member, <a href="https://forum.sushi.com/t/recommendation-for-sushi-legal-structure/11158/16" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">said</a> this decision was made because “Panamanian foundations are non-commercial in nature and do not have beneficial owners.”&nbsp;



Mike Selig, a crypto-focused attorney at law firm Willkie Farr and Gallagher, said that Wyoming’s DAO law does not take into account the uniqueness of DAOs — but has simply taken an existing LLC law and stamped the idea onto DAOs.



“Certainly a lot of these DAOs would prefer to be in the United States…but there’s not a legal wrapper that really works,” Selig told Blockworks. “What we need is a new type of legal entity that really is tailor fit for [DAOs]”



That’s not to say moving offshore is the best short-term solution, he said.



“The biggest downside in my view is that from a US perspective, [is that] courts and regulators will not respect these offshore corporate forms,” Selig said.



Frye said he, too, thinks DAOs need to take a more active role in pinning down and advocating for the needs that come with their unique structures.&nbsp;



“Until they figure that out, it’s not going to be clear how a jurisdiction is going to make itself attractive to them,” he said.&nbsp;



Added Frye: “People have started creating the organizational form — without necessarily knowing what they wanted to do yet…The older market structures are so familiar to us that it makes it really hard for us to see these new market structures for what they really are.”



<hr class="wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity"/>



Get the news in your inbox. Explore Blockworks newsletters:



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li><a href="https://blockworks.co/newsletter/the-breakdown">The Breakdown</a>: Decoding crypto and the markets. Daily.</li>



<li><a href="https://blockworks.co/newsletter/0xresearch">0xResearch</a>: Alpha in your inbox. Think like an analyst. </li>
</ul>

DAOs

DAOs Favor Classic Tax Havens, Pass Up Crypto-friendly US States

Sebastian Sinclair

<div id="highlights-block_62ac19350fdbc" class="highlights">
 <ul>
 <li>President Cortizo said the bill requires amendment in accordance with the country&#8217;s banking regulations</li>
 <li>Panama is attempting to solidify its image as a technology innovation hub within the majority Spanish speaking continent</li>
 </ul>
 
</div>



Panama&#8217;s president, Laurentino Cortizo, has partially vetoed a bill enabling citizens to use crypto as a form of payment for goods and services as well as taxes, sending the regulations back to the country&#8217;s <a href="https://cms.blockworks.co/panama-moves-forward-with-crypto-regulation-bill/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">National Assembly</a>.



Bill No. 697 had passed through the last leg of its legislative journey, before making its way to the president&#8217;s desk where it was knocked back, local news outlet <a href="https://www.prensa.com/economia/cortizo-veta-parcialmente-el-proyecto-de-ley-que-regula-los-criptoactivos/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">La Prensa</a> reported Thursday.



A partial veto is a type of veto power enabling a chief executive to reject certain provisions within a bill without vetoing its entirety. The bill will now head for another vote in the assembly, where it is expected to undergo changes to some passages.



President Cortizo, who has remained cautious about the wording of the bill for fear of facilitating money laundering, said the current piece of legislation required amendments in accordance with the country&#8217;s banking regulations.



Latin America is fast becoming a major adopter of cryptocurrencies and digital assets, following El Salvador&#8217;s historic decision last year to make bitcoin legal tender through legislative means. A <a href="https://cms.blockworks.co/bitcoin-now-legal-tender-in-special-economic-zone-of-honduras/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">special economic zone</a> in Honduras also formally legalized crypto as a form of money in April.



Panama is attempting to solidify its image as a technology innovation hub within the majority Spanish-speaking continent, and the attempt to finalize the bill by the country&#8217;s assembly was seen by many as a path toward it.



Congressman Gabriel Silva, who co-authored the bill, said in a <a href="https://twitter.com/gabrielsilva8_7/status/1537496339646500866?s=20&amp;t=cl_ogufSXxTPFdWdAkFkKg" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">tweet</a> Thursday the partial veto was a &#8220;lost opportunity&#8221; to create jobs, attract investment and incorporate technology into the public sector.



The crypto bill joins a list of other pieces of legislation overseen by Silva that have been knocked back by President Cortizo including a conflict of interest law and a mental health law, <a href="https://twitter.com/gabrielsilva8_7/status/1537500454455738371?s=20&amp;t=SuIBSwXjkffEjOS9SFf25Q" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">among others</a>.



<hr class="wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity"/>



Get the news in your inbox. Explore Blockworks newsletters:



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li><a href="https://blockworks.co/newsletter/the-breakdown">The Breakdown</a>: Decoding crypto and the markets. Daily.</li>



<li><a href="https://blockworks.co/newsletter/0xresearch">0xResearch</a>: Alpha in your inbox. Think like an analyst. </li>
</ul>

crypto bill

Panama’s President Partially Vetoes Crypto Regulations

<div id="highlights-block_62aa762598486" class="highlights">
 <ul>
 <li>Delo, along with Hayes, agreed to settle with the DOJ and CFTC and agreed to pay a $10 million fine in February</li>
 <li>The co-founder has now resolved all regulatory cases relating to BitMEX, according to the law firm representing Delo</li>
 </ul>
 
</div>



BitMEX co-founder Benjamin Delo has received 30 months on probation without home confinement following charges over his role in violating the US Bank Secrecy Act (BSA).



Delo, along with BitMEX founder Arthur Hayes, <a href="https://cms.blockworks.co/bitmex-founders-hayes-delo-plead-guilty-to-violating-us-bank-secrecy-act/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">pleaded guilty</a> to charges earlier this year by the Department of Justice (DOJ) which accused the pair of “willfully failing” to implement anti-money laundering measures at the exchange.



The case against the founders initially began two years ago when the DOJ accused Delo, Hayes and BitMEX’s first official employee Greg Dwyer of operating a &#8220;money-laundering platform&#8221; from September 2015 through to September 2020.



The exchange’s failure to implement AML and Know-Your-Customer programs were central to the department&#8217;s argument in the case for their violations of the BSA.



BSA violations carry a maximum sentence of five years, had the case gone to trial, but the pair were able to reach a plea agreement where the DOJ pushed for a 6-12 month prison sentence.



In a parallel civil case filed in February with the Commodity and Futures Trading Commission, both Hayes and Delo agreed to pay a $10 million fine, which also formed part of the agreement with the DOJ. For his involvement, Hayes previously received a six months sentence of home detention and two years of probation.



In a statement, a spokesperson for the New York-based law firm Smith Villazor LLP — representing Delo — said they were pleased the court rejected the government’s &#8220;cynical attempt to exaggerate the seriousness&#8221; of the BSA charge.



&#8220;Today’s sentence of probation recognized that this case involved a compliance lapse that led to a regulatory violation and nothing more,&#8221; the spokesperson said. &#8220;The government’s campaign — both in the courtroom and in the press — to malign Ben with highly inflammatory and misleading language concerning Ben’s conduct gained no traction with the court.&#8221;



Together with the recent settlement with the CFTC, Delo has now resolved all regulatory cases relating to BitMEX, the spokesperson said.



<hr class="wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity"/>



Get the news in your inbox. Explore Blockworks newsletters:



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li><a href="https://blockworks.co/newsletter/the-breakdown">The Breakdown</a>: Decoding crypto and the markets. Daily.</li>



<li><a href="https://blockworks.co/newsletter/0xresearch">0xResearch</a>: Alpha in your inbox. Think like an analyst. </li>
</ul>

Arthur Hayes

BitMEX Co-Founder Delo Gets 30 Months Probation, Avoids Jail Time

<div id="highlights-block_62a9643c8c20f" class="highlights">
 <ul>
 <li>Akin Gump Strauss Hauer &amp; Feld, a top US law firm, has reportedly been hired by Celsius to help navigate its ongoing crisis</li>
 <li>Celsius paused user withdrawals and transfers, citing &#8220;extreme market conditions&#8221;</li>
 </ul>
 
</div>



Cryptocurrency lender Celsius has hired a top US law firm to help navigate its financial headaches following a decision to freeze users&#8217; accounts.



Due to its ongoing liquidity crunch, Celsius has tapped Washington, DC-based unit Akin Gump Strauss Hauer &amp; Feld to assist in seeking out potential financing options from investors, the <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/crypto-lender-celsius-hires-restructuring-lawyers-after-account-freeze-11655250575" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Wall Street Journal</a> reported Tuesday.



Financial restructuring of Celsius could also be in the cards, according to the report that cited people familiar with the matter. Akin is an international law firm and one of the largest lobbying firms in the US by total revenue.



Celsius, which as of May boasted <a href="https://celsius.network/about-us" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">$11.8 billion</a> in digital assets under management, made the decision Sunday to <a href="https://cms.blockworks.co/celsius-lending-platform-suspends-withdrawals-and-transfers/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">pause withdrawals</a>, swaps and transfers between user accounts, citing “extreme market conditions.&#8221; 



Early rumors of its financial trouble, alongside tepid crypto markets, had triggered the lender&#8217;s native token CEL to collapse 90% since April, from $3.15 to $0.40 when accounts were locked.



Celsius earns revenue by <a href="https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/rehypothecation.asp" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">rehypothecating</a> customers&#8217; deposited funds. As demand for redemptions increased during the market downturn and exceeded Celsius&#8217; liquid reserves on hand, the lender was forced to unwind its positions. As such, Celsius has faced a liquidity crisis as it fails to meet customer demand.



The Hoboken-headquartered company has said it decided to pause withdrawals to “stabilize liquidity and operations” — a move that has effectively shaken confidence in lenders among institutional and retail investors alike.



Prior to the lender&#8217;s decision to freeze accounts, it promised users annual percentage yields of up to 18.6% on crypto deposits, according to its website.



Blockworks attempted to contact Celsius and Akin but did not receive a reply by press time.



<hr class="wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity"/>



Get the news in your inbox. Explore Blockworks newsletters:



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li><a href="https://blockworks.co/newsletter/the-breakdown">The Breakdown</a>: Decoding crypto and the markets. Daily.</li>



<li><a href="https://blockworks.co/newsletter/0xresearch">0xResearch</a>: Alpha in your inbox. Think like an analyst. </li>
</ul>

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer &amp; Feld

Celsius Lawyers Up Following Account Freeze, Liquidity Crunch

<div id="highlights-block_6267124a039ce" class="highlights">
 <ul>
 <li>A citizen of Spain and a citizen of the UK have been charged for their alleged involvement</li>
 <li>The pair allegedly recruited convicted Ethereum software developer Virgil Griffith to travel to North Korea to provide crypto services</li>
 </ul>
 
</div>



Two men have been charged for conspiring with former Ethereum software developer Virgil Griffith over their alleged involvement in aiding North Korea to evade US sanctions, according to the US attorney&#8217;s office of the <a href="https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/us-attorney-announces-charges-against-two-european-citizens-conspiring-us-citizen" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Southern District of New York</a>.



Spanish citizen Alejandro Cao de Benos and UK citizen Christopher Emms are alleged to have conspired to violate sanctions by recruiting Griffith to provide crypto and blockchain technology services to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) in 2019.



Griffith, who said at a sentencing hearing earlier this month that he had learned his lesson, was jailed for <a href="https://cms.blockworks.co/virgil-griffith-sentenced-to-5-years-in-prison-in-n-korean-sanctions-case/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">five years</a> after he was found guilty of traveling to North Korea to deliver a presentation based on publicly available information about open-source software.



The pair are alleged to have organized a &#8220;Pyongyang Blockchain and Cryptocurrency Conference&#8221; for the benefit of the DPRK and are purported to have recruited Griffith to provide services during the event. It is said Cao de Benos coordinated approval from the DPRK government for Griffith’s participation, the statement reads.



The US, which has economic sanctions in place against the DPRK over the country&#8217;s continued testing of prohibited nuclear-capable missiles, said Griffith had intentionally violated the sanctions under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.



The act prohibits US individuals from exporting goods, services or tech to the DPRK without express permission from the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control.



&#8220;As alleged, Alejandro Cao de Benos and Christopher Emms conspired with Virgil Griffith…to teach and advise members of the North Korean government on cutting-edge cryptocurrency and blockchain technology all for the purpose of evading US sanctions meant to stop North Korea’s hostile nuclear ambitions,&#8221; US Attorney Damian Williams said.



<hr class="wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity"/>



Get the news in your inbox. Explore Blockworks newsletters:



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li><a href="https://blockworks.co/newsletter/the-breakdown">The Breakdown</a>: Decoding crypto and the markets. Daily.</li>



<li><a href="https://blockworks.co/newsletter/0xresearch">0xResearch</a>: Alpha in your inbox. Think like an analyst. </li>
</ul>

Alejandro Cao de Benos

Two Europeans Charged In US Over Virgil Griffith North Korea Sanctions Case

<div id="highlights-block_6232bae57d46a" class="highlights">
 <ul>
 <li>Ukraine has passed its law &#8220;on virtual assets,&#8221; paving the way for a legal crypto market</li>
 <li>The country&#8217;s crypto market will be overseen by the National Securities and Stock Market Commission</li>
 </ul>
 
</div>



Ukraine clarified cryptoassets&#8217; legal status with a new law signed by the country&#8217;s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, on Wednesday.



The law sets in motion a formal framework for the establishment of a legal market for digital assets, Ukraine&#8217;s Ministry of Digital Transformation said in a <a href="https://thedigital.gov.ua/news/ukraina-legalizuvala-kriptosektor-prezident-pidpisav-profilniy-zakon" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">statement</a>.



Ukraine&#8217;s &#8220;On Virtual Assets&#8221; law comes at a time when <a href="https://cms.blockworks.co/donations-of-crypto-assets-to-ukraine-reach-19m/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">crypto donations</a> have continued to flow into the country following Russia&#8217;s military invasion on Feb. 24. Approximately <a href="https://www.businesstoday.in/crypto/story/ukraine-receives-around-100-mn-in-crypto-donations-325660-2022-03-11" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">$60 to 100 million</a> in donations have been received via cryptocurrencies, according to Ukraine&#8217;s deputy minister for digital transformation, Alex Bornyakov.



The newly formed market is to be overseen by the National Securities and Stock Market Commission. The regulator is now tasked with implementing state policy as it relates to digital assets, issuing licenses and supervision, among other responsibilities.



Specifically, the law determines the legal status, classification and ownership of digital assets including market regulators. It will also create conditions for &#8220;further formation&#8221; of the country&#8217;s digital asset market, the ministry said.



Under the new law, a list of virtual asset service providers will be kept to provide registration and financial monitoring measures.



&#8220;The signing of this Law by the President is another important step towards bringing the crypto sector out of the shadows and launching a legal market for virtual assets in Ukraine,&#8221; the ministry said in its statement.



Effects of the war in <a href="https://cms.blockworks.co/?s=ukraine" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Ukraine</a> have been a dominant driver of market moves over the past month.



Hunter Horsley, CEO of crypto asset manager Bitwise, recently <a href="https://cms.blockworks.co/ukraine-crisis-primes-crypto-cybersecurity-for-venture-funding-boost-experts-say/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">told Blockworks</a> that the war also underscores the need for decentralized solutions.



“As it pertains to Web3, I think [the conflict] is absolutely galvanizing entrepreneurs to work on building the decentralized, permissionless systems of the future,” Horsley said earlier this month.



<hr class="wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity"/>



Get the news in your inbox. Explore Blockworks newsletters:



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li><a href="https://blockworks.co/newsletter/the-breakdown">The Breakdown</a>: Decoding crypto and the markets. Daily.</li>



<li><a href="https://blockworks.co/newsletter/0xresearch">0xResearch</a>: Alpha in your inbox. Think like an analyst. </li>
</ul>

Law

Newsletter

Blockworks Research