The rejection of cryptocurrency by governments of different countries is justified by the fact that the cryptocurrency does not have reliable guarantors. But if we talk about the development of cryptocurrencies, then of course the states develop them.
The fact is that cryptocurrencies themselves are very dangerous for the state. After all, they are dangerous because a huge flow of unaccounted traffic passes through them, money is illegal money, this is criminal money and it is very difficult to control this process.
Therefore, all large states now, one way or another, are trying to develop their own projects for creating cryptocurrencies (their own digital money), while limiting the possibilities for those old cryptocurrencies that exist now.
However, I suspect that these projects will come to the surface only at the moment when they have already acquired some kind of completeness.
Topic: Cryptocurrency vs digital money issued by the State (Read 684 times)
legendary
Activity: 1680
Merit: 6524
Fully-fledged Merit Cycler|Spambuster'23|Pie Baker
They are always thinking decentralization will be full of scam activities, but they are yet to deal with scams in banks, social media ans many centralized areas which habours scammers and scam activities, and yet trying to make sure decentralization will not exist. The worst part is that the information like kyc needed for anti money laundering and counter-terrorism financing which is forced to be required by centralized bodies through governmental policies are only leaked to scammers, which are used in the scamming people.
"The worst part is that the information like kyc needed for anti money laundering and counter-terrorism financing" - this is what governs will always say for justifying their permanent hunger for personal data. But this is a lie. KYC is actualy not needed for limiting money laundering nor for combating terrorism. It is not needed for the fight against the so-called four horsemen of infocalypse" - money launderers, drug lords, terrorists, and pedophiles. 1miau explained very well in his topic (Why KYC is extremely dangerous – and useless) why KYC is actually dangerous. Governs use KYC and AML for obtaining money, not for fighting against the horsemen of infocalypse. And for obtaining data. Big data.
For more info on this subject, please also read these other two topics of mine (including the posts): Governs are coming for the traders! and Governs try to limit access of public to information and freedom since ages. They will bring even more light on this malicious decisions made by governs...
The governments are always trying to prove centralization is the best, but it should only be an alternative to decentralization, but the governments will not agree, I believe you read the latest news 'Data encryption a threat to fighting child sexual abuse, says DOJ'. Even, aside money, goverments want to compromise peoples privacy in all aspect of life to the extent they do not want end-to-end encryptions in this world that are full of scam, this is uncalled for in my view. Some people can share private information and if the platform used does not support end-to-end encryption, scammers can get hold of the information.
They are always thinking decentralization will be full of scam activities, but they are yet to deal with scams in banks, social media ans many centralized areas which habours scammers and scam activities, and yet trying to make sure decentralization will not exist. The worst part is that the information like kyc needed for anti money laundering and counter-terrorism financing which is forced to be required by centralized bodies through governmental policies are only leaked to scammers, which are used in the scamming people.
Centralization has failed us, it weakens us to think governments will protect our money, not knowing kyc are actually reviewed to scammers which are used in many ways to scam people. People have forgotten they were saving money before without the use of any bank, at that time, they were conscious of the ways to protect their money from thieves rather than when it is in bank and thinking nothing will happen until scam results, social media which is also centralized contribute more to this. Come to think of it, cryptocurrencies like bitcoin can offer you the privacy in a way no thief will know about any bitcoin or altcoin linked to you, and in a way you can well protect your private key, which makes bitcoin safe from physical and digital thieves, only the requisite is to learn how to avoid scam.
They are always thinking decentralization will be full of scam activities, but they are yet to deal with scams in banks, social media ans many centralized areas which habours scammers and scam activities, and yet trying to make sure decentralization will not exist. The worst part is that the information like kyc needed for anti money laundering and counter-terrorism financing which is forced to be required by centralized bodies through governmental policies are only leaked to scammers, which are used in the scamming people.
Centralization has failed us, it weakens us to think governments will protect our money, not knowing kyc are actually reviewed to scammers which are used in many ways to scam people. People have forgotten they were saving money before without the use of any bank, at that time, they were conscious of the ways to protect their money from thieves rather than when it is in bank and thinking nothing will happen until scam results, social media which is also centralized contribute more to this. Come to think of it, cryptocurrencies like bitcoin can offer you the privacy in a way no thief will know about any bitcoin or altcoin linked to you, and in a way you can well protect your private key, which makes bitcoin safe from physical and digital thieves, only the requisite is to learn how to avoid scam.
legendary
Activity: 1680
Merit: 6524
Fully-fledged Merit Cycler|Spambuster'23|Pie Baker
I think he meant that no govern would want a decentralized digital currency issued by the state and there is no chance for this to happen, therefore any such tentative should be avoided.
You seriously think that decentralization feature is benefit for governments? In fact majority of advantages highlighted by OP are not liked at all by governments. What governments has to do with a currency that it cant control, monitor and manipulate. Governments are only interested in fiat that are backed by them and not by community. There are few issues with bitcoin also kike its volatility and speed.
Whatever cryptocurrency issued by governments from whatever nations are not worthy to use. Something should be considered with the government-/state-issued cryptocurrency:
- Decentralization: this basic characteristic of crypto is seriously broken. Governments or states control and make it as centralized as possible.
- Inflation rate: I believe governments or states will keep and control the inflation rates as same as what they do with fiats.
- KYCs: they do require KYCs as mandatory requirements.
One word: Avoid!
- Decentralization: this basic characteristic of crypto is seriously broken. Governments or states control and make it as centralized as possible.
- Inflation rate: I believe governments or states will keep and control the inflation rates as same as what they do with fiats.
- KYCs: they do require KYCs as mandatory requirements.
One word: Avoid!
legendary
Activity: 1680
Merit: 6524
Fully-fledged Merit Cycler|Spambuster'23|Pie Baker
A specter is haunting the modern world, the specter of crypto anarchy - Tim May
I'm starting this topic as a "part two" of another topic of mine - Governs are coming for the traders!, being, in part, influenced by reading (the title of) this thread: Why are the world’s governments not using cryptocurrencies?.
Governments don't want to use cryptocurrencies; at least not decentralized ones. Because they need to control everything - from personal information to data and money. You can not do anything without a government issued ID - you can not go to school, you can not drive a car, you can not get marry and so on. Governs needs all their citizen's data, including their financial information. For this reason governs try as much as possible to eradicate cash money and switch them with credit / debit cards. Cash money are hard to be tracked, while digital transactions are always stored by the banks, which act as government arms, providing the authorities all the data they ask about people.
Realizing all the hype about crypto, understanding that people are heading towards using digital currencies, governs started, with bigger or smaller steps, to think about offering such money to their citizens. But not decentralized cryptocurrencies, which are anonymous or pseudonymous -- they want to offer centralized cryptocurrencies, a kind of money which can be tracked, associated with real names and which has a value determined by the govern instead of the free market. Take for example Venezuela's Petro, Russia's CryptoRuble, Japan's J-coin, China and so on.
Of course, state-issued digital currencies are totally opposed to cryptocurrencies and the differences between them are so many, that is difficult to count all of them:
- cryptocurrencies are meant to liberate people from the slavery imposed by banks and governments, eliminating the middle man and facilitating peer to peer transfers; digital currencies issued by governs are based on trusted third parties (banks), they are designed to continue to enslave people, to give them the illusion of freedom, while in fact they are oppressed;
- cryptocurrencies are providing anonymity / pseudonymity and the users are their true owners, as they hold their private keys; digital money invented by governs won't offer private keys to people, will be trackable and, most likely, won't be mineable (instead, it will be held by the banks);
- (most of) cryptocurrencies have a fixed number of coins, in order to avoid inflation; digital money issued by governs won't have a fixed number, as the governs are seeking inflation and not deflation, because inflation is an indirect tax supported by many people even without being aware of. It is harder to force people to accept a direct tax, compared with imposing them an indirect tax; in case the indirect tax is not even realized, governs' work is way easier;
- cryptocurrencies' value is determined by the free market (or, at least, it should be; let's not think now about whales); governs' money has a value established by the State.
And the list can go on.
As a matter of fact, the only thing in common for cryptocurrencies and the digital currencies issued by State is that both want to get rid of fiat money. But, obviously, for totally different reasons: cryptocurrencies want to change the actual system, which is corrupt to the roots, while the governs want to keep the system, but with a different financial instrument, which would give people the false perception of using cryptocurrencies.
This future was forseen a long time ago by the Cypherpunks, the Founding Fathers of crypto anarchy. If you are among those who started to refuse governs' corrupt fiat money, don't let yourself tricked into using a digital currency issued by the State!
Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences! (Tim May, The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto, 1988)
[To be continued]
Translations (in chronological order):
I'm starting this topic as a "part two" of another topic of mine - Governs are coming for the traders!, being, in part, influenced by reading (the title of) this thread: Why are the world’s governments not using cryptocurrencies?.
Governments don't want to use cryptocurrencies; at least not decentralized ones. Because they need to control everything - from personal information to data and money. You can not do anything without a government issued ID - you can not go to school, you can not drive a car, you can not get marry and so on. Governs needs all their citizen's data, including their financial information. For this reason governs try as much as possible to eradicate cash money and switch them with credit / debit cards. Cash money are hard to be tracked, while digital transactions are always stored by the banks, which act as government arms, providing the authorities all the data they ask about people.
Realizing all the hype about crypto, understanding that people are heading towards using digital currencies, governs started, with bigger or smaller steps, to think about offering such money to their citizens. But not decentralized cryptocurrencies, which are anonymous or pseudonymous -- they want to offer centralized cryptocurrencies, a kind of money which can be tracked, associated with real names and which has a value determined by the govern instead of the free market. Take for example Venezuela's Petro, Russia's CryptoRuble, Japan's J-coin, China and so on.
Of course, state-issued digital currencies are totally opposed to cryptocurrencies and the differences between them are so many, that is difficult to count all of them:
- cryptocurrencies are meant to liberate people from the slavery imposed by banks and governments, eliminating the middle man and facilitating peer to peer transfers; digital currencies issued by governs are based on trusted third parties (banks), they are designed to continue to enslave people, to give them the illusion of freedom, while in fact they are oppressed;
- cryptocurrencies are providing anonymity / pseudonymity and the users are their true owners, as they hold their private keys; digital money invented by governs won't offer private keys to people, will be trackable and, most likely, won't be mineable (instead, it will be held by the banks);
- (most of) cryptocurrencies have a fixed number of coins, in order to avoid inflation; digital money issued by governs won't have a fixed number, as the governs are seeking inflation and not deflation, because inflation is an indirect tax supported by many people even without being aware of. It is harder to force people to accept a direct tax, compared with imposing them an indirect tax; in case the indirect tax is not even realized, governs' work is way easier;
- cryptocurrencies' value is determined by the free market (or, at least, it should be; let's not think now about whales); governs' money has a value established by the State.
And the list can go on.
As a matter of fact, the only thing in common for cryptocurrencies and the digital currencies issued by State is that both want to get rid of fiat money. But, obviously, for totally different reasons: cryptocurrencies want to change the actual system, which is corrupt to the roots, while the governs want to keep the system, but with a different financial instrument, which would give people the false perception of using cryptocurrencies.
This future was forseen a long time ago by the Cypherpunks, the Founding Fathers of crypto anarchy. If you are among those who started to refuse governs' corrupt fiat money, don't let yourself tricked into using a digital currency issued by the State!
Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences! (Tim May, The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto, 1988)
[To be continued]
Translations (in chronological order):
- Română: Criptomonede vs bani digitali emiși de Stat, translation by GazetaBitcoin
- Filipino: [Translation] Kripto vs Pera na nailimbag ng bansa, translation by Peanutswar
- Indonesian: [Translation] Mata Uang Kripto Vs Uang digital yang dikeluarkan oleh Negara, translation by dansus021
- Polish: Kryptowaluta kontra cyfrowy pieniądz emitowany przez państwo, translation by cygan
- Pidgin: Cryptocurrency nd digital money Palava by di state, translation by Agbe
- French: Cryptomonnaies vs monnaies numériques émises par l'État, translation by iwantmyhomepaidwithbtc2
- Bengali: ক্রিপ্টো vs সরকারের বানানো ডিজটাল মুদ্রা, translation by Learn Bitcoin
- Russian: Кpиптoвaлютa vs цифpoвыe дeньги гocyдapcт, translation by FP91G
- Urdu: کرپٹو کرنسی بمقابلہ ڈیجیٹل پیسہ ریاست, translation by JunaidAzizi
- German: Kryptowährung kontra staatlich ausgegebenes digitales Geld, translation by cygan
- Ukrainian: Кpиптoвaлютa vs цифpoвi гpoшi, випyщeнi дepжaвoю, translation by DrBeer
Jump to: