Dear Securities and Exchange Commission, I am writing to submit my public comment on the proposed rule "Safeguarding Advisory Client Assets" While I appreciate the SEC's efforts to enhance investor protections and address gaps in the custody rule, I have several concerns regarding the lack of clarity on the definition of digital assets and the potential adverse impact on crypto investors. The proposal does not provide clear guidance on what constitutes a digital asset, leading to confusion and potential misinterpretation. This lack of clarity is particularly concerning given the rapid growth and evolving nature of the digital asset economy. Without a clear definition, investors and advisers may inadvertently violate the rule, creating unnecessary compliance risks and hindering innovation in the digital asset space. Digital assets, such as cryptocurrencies, have emerged as transformative financial instruments built on blockchain technology. They offer unique benefits, including increased transparency, security, and efficiency. However, regulatory uncertainties surrounding digital assets have hindered their mainstream adoption and hindered their full potential. My concern lies in the repeated harmful measures imposed on crypto investors by the SEC. Each time such measures are announced, it not only stifles innovation but also damages the public image of the SEC as it often appears as an antagonist in the crypto space. The lack of clarity and restrictive nature of the proposed rule exacerbates these concerns and could potentially limit the growth and development of the digital asset market, ultimately harming investors. I understand the need for investor protections and the SEC's responsibility to safeguard market integrity. However, it is crucial that regulation strikes a balance between protecting investors and encouraging innovation within the digital asset space. The proposed rule does not adequately address the nuanced realities of digital assets and the underlying technology, forcing market participants to operate within a regulatory framework ill-suited to their unique characteristics. Furthermore, the lack of clarity in the definition of digital assets not only creates uncertainty but also leaves room for inconsistent interpretation by advisers, auditors, and regulators. This variability in interpretation may lead to inconsistent enforcement, exacerbating compliance challenges for market participants and potentially resulting in regulatory arbitrage. I strongly urge the SEC to consider industry input and provide clearer guidance on the definition of digital assets. By doing so, the SEC can foster responsible innovation, cultivate investor confidence, and promote a regulatory environment that allows the digital asset market to flourish. In conclusion, the lack of clarity on the definition of digital assets in the proposed rule raises concerns regarding unintended consequences and potential harm to crypto investors. I implore the SEC to carefully consider the impact of their regulations on the digital asset market and engage in a collaborative dialogue with industry stakeholders to strike an appropriate balance between investor protections and market innovation. Thank you for considering my comments. I trust that you will carefully review all public comments and take them into account when finalizing the rule. Sincerely, Anonymous