Regulators should focus on consumer protection

Regulators should focus on operating (or overseeing) rating agencies, and formal review of proposed standards

Fungibility is important, and many regulatory goals are contrary to fungibility, indicating that their forms of money will be inferior and their economy will be left behind.

Anonymity should be a core value-- the society with the most privacy will have the most advantages.

The importance of regulatory sandboxes (which should be optional).

Permissionless innovation

Users should opt-in to consumer protection tools.

Regulatory compliance should be optional, but not required.

Regulators should promote high quality businesses and products that follow good standards, and de-escalate scams and insecure companies.

The benefits of verifiable credentials

It is very unclear whether these regulators have really engaged Bitcoin Core developers. I keep very extensive notes, and there's very few workshops like this. So where are these regulators getting their information from? Open sessions are required.

Confidential transactions are compatible with auditing and regulation

Backdoors are security holes, third-parties are security holes. You may trust your government with your backdoor, but do you trust all the future political groups that might have control of that system?

Who has really reviewed any of the technical work at these companies? Which Bitcoin Core developers? Who exactly has reviewed this work? Are regulators really engaging at this level? It's very much not clear to me.

provenance of the supply chain of the source code, and toolchain building (guix and deterministic builds)