• Passerby6497@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    Again, why would the government waste real money doing that with fake money, when they can do it with real money instead? What benefit is there, over just being a regular processor for real money? Because it’s definitely not the inability to reverse transactions in blockchain systems, that’s more of a feature for criminals.

      • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Actually, that is a decent point in this idea’s favor. Don’t think that’ll overcome the downsides, but I’ll give you a point for that one all the same.

    • NateNate60@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      I have a very strong feeling that @paf0@lemmy.world is being downvoted here, not because they make a bad point, but because they phrased it in terms of cryptocurrency which immediately triggers negative reactions from everyone.

      What OP has proposed is neither novel, nor a terrible idea. In fact, economists call it a central bank digital currency. And yes, some countries have adopted it. It’s usually not run with a blockchain, but that’s because if you have a trusted central entity to run the system, that being the central bank, a blockchain is inferior in practically every aspect to a normal relational database. That’s why all current CBDCs still use fairly traditional accounting systems.

      Your use, however, of the terms “real money” and “fake money” has, I believe, the effect of shutting down intelligent conversation, rather than encouraging it. “Money” is a social construct. “Real money” is whatever the Government declares to be “real” and that the population is willing to use. It doesn’t need to be physical money. And it is unquestionable that in the countries that have adopted the legal framework that allows their central banks to issue CBDCs, the money so issued this way is as real and legally equivalent to paper banknotes and metal coins.

      • paf0@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        I struggle with the idea that “real money”, even as crypto, needs to be centralized and easily tracked. It’s not just about crime, it’s about privacy. The federal reserve doesn’t need to know the movements of every single individual. If I lend you $10, and you don’t pay me back, it’s both embarrassing for me and embarrassing for you, but we’re good friends and this is just between us. Maybe you could provide that sort of anonymity on a relational database, but it doesn’t have to be centralized. The blockchain tech gets faster and faster and not everyone has to be a full node, they could just run it at banks, maybe even with a bridge to other systems.

        Anyway, I understand where people are coming from, blockchain was ruined by cryptobros and scammers. It’s not an inherently evil idea, it may be inadequate in speed as compared to Visa, but the idea that I could take the middleman out of any business while still having common listings, and make it a conversation between a supplier and consumer is fundamentally good. We do not need Sabre or Expedia taking 15% of every hotel or airline booking. We do need Uber’s secret pricing on rideshares. Very little value is added by middlemen in those transactions, where, in the end, the reputation of the provider is paramount- and yes, things can be set up so that provider can be vetted by third parties. The promise of blockchain is not NFTs, it’s freedom to do business in a different way, and some of the limiting factors holding it back are the lack of clear regulations for the industry, and a trusted stablecoin network.

        • NateNate60@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          There are a few types of “anonymity”.

          The highest level of anonymity is perfect anonymity, where it is literally impossible to prove a transaction occurred or know anything about that transaction without being a party to that transaction. Some private cryptocurrencies are truly perfectly anonymous because it’s cryptographically infeasible to determine who paid whom and how much was paid without being a party to that transaction. Metal coins are generally perfectly anonymous. Paper money is nearly perfectly anonymous. They still have serial numbers that can be traced. It is easy to make arguments that perfect anonymity is undesirable because the drawbacks of allowing criminals, terrorist organisations, or sanctioned states to transact freely and in complete secrecy outweigh the privacy benefits to normal people compared to what they enjoy with lower levels of anonymity. I am not here to make an argument about this.

          The next-highest level is what I will call “legal anonymity”, where knowledge of transaction details is tightly restricted by law. If you think of Swiss bank secrecy laws, this is close to what I mean. A CBDC can operate at this level of anonymity. The central bank would still theoretically know all details of all transactions, but the use of this information would be legally restricted and cannot be used for mass surveillance. However, the information is still retrievable by means of some defined legal process, such as a court subpoena or specific search warrant.

          The level below that is what I will call “discretionary anonymity”. This is where a third party knows all the transaction details, and the restrictions on what they can do with this information are either weak or non-existent. Hence, your privacy is at the discretion of whoever holds this information. This form of privacy is weak compared to the other forms but a large portion of the population still finds this level of anonymity to be acceptable for everyday transactions. Bank transactions in the USA are discretionarily private. The bank can use and exploit the transaction data it knows with relatively few legal restrictions.

          The final level is pseudo-anonymity, where transaction data is publicly accessible, but some information (such as the exact names of the payor and payee) is not provided. Bitcoin and most other cryptocurrencies are pseudo-anonymous.

    • HappyTimeHarry@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      if the government was to do their own crypto it could do a lot to disrupt the current unregulated “stablecoins” that currently exist, i could see it happing if for no other reason than to fight money laundering. If the fed is doing it, it becomes “real” money and most people would probably prefer a fed coin to something like usdt.

      • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        What benefit is there, over just being a regular processor for real money?

        Online payments, which is a lot of transactions.

        Pretty sure the current system of real money already handles that one friend.

    • paf0@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      It would be real money if the federal reserve issued it. Cash still exists, is that a feature for criminals or does it benefit the poor and unbanked?

      • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        It would be real money if the federal reserve issued it.

        No, as you said, its a stable coin backed by real money.

        Cash still exists, is that a feature for criminals or does it benefit the poor and unbanked?

        Cash transactions can easily be reversed, unlike blockchain, but nice bait.

        • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Cash transactions can easily be reversed, unlike blockchain, but nice bait.

          Literally the opposite is true…