There could not be a more obvious example of regulation by enforcement. Rather than telling banks what the enforcement "risks" are, the regulators should tell banks what the rules are. If there are no rules, the FDIC should propose them.

Ultimately, Mr. Hsu's approach would kill innovation. One can say "innovate responsibly," and it sounds good, but it is not meaningful unless there are real actions that one can take to achieve that end.

It is true that AI currently leads to unpredictable results and the creators do not fully understand why the programs reach certain conclusions. That said, if their use is prohibited until those issues are solved (assuming they can ever be solved), the problems won't be solved because…

The alarming development of malicious services such as should make clear the imprudence of the SEC's proposal to force mandatory central clearing of U.S. governments (both cash market and repo). How can anyone be confident that the FICC will be able to defend itself against cyber attacks when so many firms and governmental entities have been victimized?  A mandated conduit through which government securities must flow presents a compelling target for malicious actors using increasingly…

The regulations that could result from the FSOC decision likely would be based on the regulations to which bank holding companies are subject and would be entirely unsuited to the regulation of other types of entities. The systemic risk statutory provisions were an example of the Dodd-Frank provisions that were adopted in the post-financial crisis burst of legislative exuberance. They are utterly impractical in actuality as applied to non-banks. See also, ;; .