its not about "code" (you have been reading mis-informed blogs/tweets) its about if that code operates as a service
there is a term "software-as-a-service" SaaS)
yes this has other implications where by when code starts operating as a organisation, association, as a service.. then jurisdictions start applying
for instance blockstreams liquid is an example(its federation), another would be LN users that offer "routing" would be payment facilitators/ money services
I've noticed that it's not the first time you've made assumptions about what I read, franky1, and I'd like to clarify my sources to avoid any misunderstandings. I mainly follow the Tornado Cash situation through eff.org and am also somewhat familiar with software-related terminology))
The main point I wanted to emphasize in my initial post was the state views on Bitcoin and distributed / decentralized technologies, as well as the potential for authorities to harshly deal with them (eh, us / some of us).
The Bitcoin network has a governance structure in which roles are assigned to identified individuals. Authorities could decide that these should be prosecuted in view of the large scale of illegal payments using Bitcoin. Decentralized finance can be regulated as forcefully as the legislator considers necessary.
I'm happy for any state that has you as a citizen, and I genuinely hope that none of us will ever have to choose between state views on Bitcoin "code as an entity" and our shared interest, passion, and investment in the Bitcoin topic. Peace ✌️