M
Malairte MLRT
Back to Articles
· 7 min read

Project Crypto and the Case for Open, CPU/GPU-Mined Networks Like MLRT

Project Crypto, announced in July 2025, is the SEC's framework for treating open, on-chain networks as first-class infrastructure. CPU/GPU-mined MLRT is exactly that kind of network.

Source Reviewed
American Leadership in the Digital Finance Revolution ↗
Chairman Paul S. Atkins ·

Project Crypto and the Case for Open, CPU/GPU-Mined Networks Like MLRT

Source reviewed: Chairman Paul S. Atkins — "American Leadership in the Digital Finance Revolution" (July 31, 2025).

In late July 2025, SEC Chairman Paul Atkins delivered a speech announcing "Project Crypto," a comprehensive initiative to modernize the agency's framework for digital assets. The speech, titled "American Leadership in the Digital Finance Revolution," was simultaneously a critique of the prior administration's enforcement-driven approach and a positive program: clear rules, narrower jurisdiction, and explicit room for on-chain systems to operate as first-class market infrastructure.

For Malairt (MLRT), a Bitcoin-style proof-of-work chain that is openly CPU/GPU-mineable with no premine and no foundation, Project Crypto is meaningful not because it singles out coins like MLRT — it doesn't — but because the network design Project Crypto presupposes is precisely the design MLRT was built around.

What Project Crypto is

The Atkins speech put several things on the table at once:

  • A definitive rejection of regulation-by-enforcement. Going forward, the SEC would aim to set clear rules through public notice and comment rather than discover the rules through litigation.
  • A narrower view of the SEC's jurisdictional reach over crypto. Atkins stated that, in his view, most crypto assets are not securities — a marked shift from the previous expansive position.
  • An "innovation exemption" to be designed by staff, providing conditional relief that would let firms deploy on-chain products without being trapped by legacy rules that were never written for this technology.
  • A directive to integrate on-chain systems into US markets. Open, blockchain-based software systems would be treated as legitimate venues, not as suspicious workarounds.
  • Explicit alignment with the President's Working Group recommendations on crypto.

The speech's framing was that the United States should be the global home of crypto markets, and that the SEC's job was to remove the regulatory friction that had been pushing developers and capital offshore.

Why "open" is the operative word

Project Crypto's logic depends on a category that the speech treated as worth protecting: networks that are genuinely open. Anyone can read the software, anyone can run a node, anyone can transact, and the protocol's rules are not under the operational control of a small managerial group.

That openness is what allows the agency to step back. If a network is open in this strong sense, then the Howey analysis loses its grip. There is no enterprise to register, because there is no enterprise — there is just software running on independent computers under shared rules.

A second, less-discussed implication is openness on the production side: who can produce blocks. A network where only a small set of capital-intensive actors can profitably mine is open in name but oligopolistic in practice. A network where any household with a CPU or a GPU can mine is open in fact.

This is where mining design starts to matter for the regulatory analysis, not just the engineering one.

Why CPU/GPU mineability matters under this framing

MLRT is intentionally CPU- and GPU-mineable. It does not present an ASIC moat. There are good engineering reasons for that — broader hash distribution, more diverse miner geography, less single-vendor risk. But there is also a clean alignment with Project Crypto's core idea.

If "open networks" are the regulatory category that gets treated as outside the SEC's jurisdictional core, then how open matters. CPU/GPU mineability:

  • Lowers the barrier to becoming a producer. Any household can compete for block rewards using hardware they already own.
  • Disperses control over consensus. The set of actors who can profitably participate in producing blocks is larger and more geographically diverse than on ASIC-only chains.
  • Reduces dependence on a small set of hardware vendors. A protocol whose security depends on chips from one or two manufacturers is open in software but constrained in hardware supply.
  • Makes mining a participation activity, not a capital-only activity. This matches the Howey analysis the SEC staff used in its March 2025 mining statement: miners earn from their own work, not from the efforts of others.

A born-mined coin that is openly mineable on commodity hardware is, in this framing, the strongest possible candidate for the "open network" category Project Crypto recognizes.

How MLRT's design lines up with Project Crypto's posture

Project Crypto is a process and a direction, not a single rule. But the kinds of networks it implicitly favors share a profile, and MLRT lives inside that profile:

  • No ICO, no premine, no foundation, no promoter. There is nobody whose entrepreneurial efforts MLRT holders are depending on.
  • Bitcoin-style UTXO design. A well-understood, audited model with clean separation between protocol and applications.
  • Fixed monetary policy. 50 MLRT initial subsidy, halving every 210,000 blocks, 2-minute target spacing — coded, not curated.
  • Open-source node software (malairte-node) that anyone can read, build, and run.
  • CPU/GPU mineable by design, with no specialized-hardware gating.
  • Self-custody as the default. Users hold their own keys against their own validated copy of the chain.

Paraphrasing the Project Crypto framing: most crypto assets are not securities, the SEC should focus on areas where genuine investor protection issues exist, and on-chain systems should be integrated into US markets rather than pushed offshore.

A network with the MLRT profile does not need a special carve-out under that framing. It needs the regulator to confirm what the network already is.

The broader policy bet

Project Crypto is, in effect, a bet that openness scales better than control. If the bet pays off, US users get to participate in genuinely permissionless networks with less regulatory friction, and US developers get to publish open-source protocol software without being treated as financial intermediaries. If the bet fails, the SEC retains the option to revisit. But the direction is clear, and the speech is the clearest articulation of it from a sitting Chair.

For mineable, born-mined coins, that direction is supportive. The category Project Crypto wants to legitimize is the category these coins live in.

What this means for MLRT users

  • Project Crypto's direction is favorable to networks like MLRT. The framing assumes that genuinely open, on-chain systems can be left to operate without being treated as registered securities markets.
  • CPU/GPU mineability is a feature in this regulatory environment, not just an engineering choice. It strengthens the "no efforts of others" reading.
  • Openness has to be maintained, not just claimed. Continue running independent nodes. Don't let a single party accumulate operational control over the network or its software.
  • No promises of endorsement. Project Crypto does not pick winners. It defines a category and lets networks fit themselves into it. MLRT was built to fit.

References

This article is editorial commentary published by the Malairte project. It is not legal or investment advice and does not represent the views of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission or any of its staff or commissioners.

Back to Articles