First of all, there is no such thing as a “Crypto Asset” this is a portmanteau a made up phrase borne of backward analogies computer illiterates have constructed to give their arguments form.
As soon as anyone says the phrase "Crypto Assets", you know you’re dealing with an ignoramus, in the strict Latin sense of that word: “Know Nothing”.
Users who have control over private keys do not have “custody” of Bitcoin. The word “custody” is another analogy used to encapsulate the idea that these users don’t have to ask another person to sign a message on their behalf.
No one “custodies” Bitcoin at all; there are no “Bitcoins”.
You can blame the idea that Bitcoins are like actual coins from the retarded use of the gold coin images that have polluted the minds of politicians and many others. This money imagery is the cause of the widespread confusion over what Bitcoin actually is, which is not money, but a messaging and database system.
It is simply not true that “transactions are processed on the user’s local device”. Bitcoin signatures do not require a device at all, and can be made with a pencil an piece of graph paper.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=y3dqhixzGVo&ab_channel=KenShirriff
Lummis & Co. do not know this, because they are computer illiterates. Most people are, and that's OK. What is NOT OK is telling American citizens what they can do with their writing of math. That's unacceptable at any time and anti-American by default.
If they knew this fact about what Bitcoin actually is, that it is a form of writing (math), they would understand that the devices people use are mere conveniences and not prerequisites to signing messages before being sent to the Bitcoin network for addition to the chain of blocks, which does require a computer.
The fact that a computer is required to send messages is also protected speech under the Constitution, lest anyone believe that the use of a computer changes the nature of the basic act.
For Lummis & Co. because Bitcoin wallets look just like their Bank of America apps, they cannot conceive of what is actually going on under the hood of a Bitcoin “wallet” app, and how radically different these apps are from banking apps.
They see the conventions used by Bitcoin “wallets” including a chronological list of “transactions” and a “balance”, without any understanding of of what is happening in the background. They think the analogies are the reality. That is not so.
For all her many faults, Lummis is trying her best to get to grips with Bitcoin. She has not doubled down on some of her more outrageous and insulting ideas (https://medium.com/@beautyon_/unpacking-the-lummis-gillibrand-responsible-financial-innovation-act-6128e6db6a68), has abandoned them in a timely manner of her own accord (apparently), and so she should be applauded and helped correct her thinking, since this appears to be possible, so that she can transform herself into an ally of American citizens from being a leader in the ranks of the bitter enemies of, "We the People".
