Re:Technical feasibility of regulating public Blockchain exp...
by Zak on Friday December 22, 2017 @07:03PM
(#15991944)
> but I also disagree with the idea of removing all kind of monetary power from the hands of governments
I don't have enough expertise or moral authority to say for sure whether that would be good or not. Governments fought very hard to get substantially increased monetary power during the 20th century, and the world that followed is a pretty good place. For all the bad news we hear, violence, starvation, disease and other metrics of badness are near historic lows. Some attribute those gains largely to government action, but I think a lot of the improvements were social and technological. As an example, better access to information makes people aware that those who employ violence usually don't get good results, so others are less likely to do so.
What I do feel fairly confident in saying is that for better or worse, it's fairly likely to happen. Here's the approximate scenario I see playing out:
First, a cryptocurrency becomes somewhat popular for actual use as a currency. It won't be Bitcoin. It might not even be one that exists yet, but it will happen sooner or later. It need not be universally accepted, but if you can buy groceries, fuel and a cup of coffee in most major cities on one or more continents, that will be sufficient.
Next, there needs to be a financial crisis affecting that continent. These happen every couple decades. It's a near certainty. Bonus points for runs on banks, slowness or failure of protection mechanisms like FDIC, rapid inflation or political instability.
The next step is that people start using the cryptocurrency in preference to the government currency, banks and payment cards. Of course, the government might want to prevent this, but any actual attempt at enforcing a ban would meet great resistance from the significant fraction of the population already using it.
I'm not sure what follows. I have little doubt that parts of the transition will be quite ugly. I hope the improvements the world has made survive it.
I don't have enough expertise or moral authority to say for sure whether that would be good or not. Governments fought very hard to get substantially increased monetary power during the 20th century, and the world that followed is a pretty good place. For all the bad news we hear, violence, starvation, disease and other metrics of badness are near historic lows. Some attribute those gains largely to government action, but I think a lot of the improvements were social and technological. As an example, better access to information makes people aware that those who employ violence usually don't get good results, so others are less likely to do so.
What I do feel fairly confident in saying is that for better or worse, it's fairly likely to happen. Here's the approximate scenario I see playing out:
First, a cryptocurrency becomes somewhat popular for actual use as a currency. It won't be Bitcoin. It might not even be one that exists yet, but it will happen sooner or later. It need not be universally accepted, but if you can buy groceries, fuel and a cup of coffee in most major cities on one or more continents, that will be sufficient.
Next, there needs to be a financial crisis affecting that continent. These happen every couple decades. It's a near certainty. Bonus points for runs on banks, slowness or failure of protection mechanisms like FDIC, rapid inflation or political instability.
The next step is that people start using the cryptocurrency in preference to the government currency, banks and payment cards. Of course, the government might want to prevent this, but any actual attempt at enforcing a ban would meet great resistance from the significant fraction of the population already using it.
I'm not sure what follows. I have little doubt that parts of the transition will be quite ugly. I hope the improvements the world has made survive it.