According to online reports, former SEC official John Reed Stark posted on X that the SEC's recent series of statements to relax cryptocurrency regulation were not innovative or revolutionary. Instead, statements like last week's SEC statement about Staking products are simply excuses: 1) irresponsibly encouraging investors to spend their hard-earned money on high-risk, dangerous cryptocurrency products; and 2) foolishly contributing to systemic risk in global financial markets. As Securities and Exchange Commission Commissioner Carolyn Crenshaw As Caroline Crenshaw, a professor at the Securities and Exchange Commission eloquently explained in her objection to the recent crypto decree of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the conclusions of the Securities and Exchange Commission staff conflict with many previous enforcement actions by the Securities and Exchange Commission that claimed that the pledge as a service program was an investment contract under the Howe Act: The staff's analysis may reflect some people's expectations of the law, but it is inconsistent with the court's decision on pledge and the Haowei jurisprudence on which it has long been based. This once again reflects the SEC's continued "false first, real" approach to the cryptocurrency space-acting based on expectations of future changes, while ignoring existing laws... I still believe that these staff statements do more harm than good because they claim to classify broad categories of cryptocurrency products without analyzing how they actually operate.