6 ms·

I love when you get little glimpses like these into the mindset of leadership and realize they are just ordinary people who don't know what they're doing either

I love when you get little glimpses like these into the mindset of leadership and realize they are just ordinary people who don't know what they're doing either. I'm not a crypto enthusiast but even I have to chuckle and shake my head at situations like this. An official cryptocurrency run by the Reserve Bank of India defeats one of the main selling points of a decentralized cryptocurrency...

m3kw9 6y ago
Digital currency can different than crypto currencies. The point is they want centralization.
- omk 6y ago
  Digital currency is no different that what already exists in terms of digital representation of one's holding. Really curious to see how the tax payer is going to pay for a glorified database and what value is derived from it.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - ampdepolymerase 6y ago
    How fast is clearing and settlement in traditional Indian banking?
    - geektips 6y ago
      It depends on the system used for transaction[0]. For transaction under $1300 settlements are instant, while for amount more than that it ranges from 30 minutes to 24 hours. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payment_and_settlement_systems_in_India https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payment_and_settlement_syste...
      - manquer 6y ago
        During working hours on week days for largers amounts RTGS is real time and minimum amount is $2500 and is few seconds fast.
  - analog31 6y ago
    If they are anything like the US, then they already have a sophisticated database of financial transactions in support of their tax system and national security apparatus.
  - louloulou 6y ago
    It's just a round-a-bout way of getting rid of cash so they can surveil all transactions
meowkit 6y ago
> An official cryptocurrency run by the Reserve Bank of India defeats one of the main selling points of a decentralized cryptocurrency... You can still have a centralized token asset as your currency. It defeats the purpose of open source and public blockchain utility, but gives a government massive control over its currency.
- teawrecks 6y ago
  But then what's the point? You can already achieve the same outcome way more efficiently using existing centralized methods.
  - doovd 6y ago
    Ye idk what the guy above you was trying to say TBH
  - gogopuppygogo 6y ago
    Better tools to government surveillance of citizens is the goal
  - chii 6y ago
    > using existing centralized methods. gives them an excuse to ban an uncontrollable currency/asset. But the paradoxical thing is that if the gov't creates their own crypto they control (and ban the "real" decentralized crypto), they give legitimacy to the idea of crypto, and thus, make bitcoins and other uncontrollable cryptos even more popular. You can't actually ban crypto, anymore than you can ban maths.
    - londons_explore 6y ago
      A government could totally ban crypto. If I wanted to do so as a leader I would: * Log which citizens visited any crypto related domains (exchanges, crypto wallet app servers etc.) * Make a law banning the holding or exchange of crypto. Give everyone 1 week to comply. * Make a government address to send coins to for disposal, and publish a form to fill in to say you have disposed of your holdings. * Contact everyone in your log telling they need to fill in the form (even to declare they no longer have any holdings). * After the deadline, arrest anyone who has not filled in the form or who declares zero holdings and subsequently visits exchanges etc. * Sure, this method will miss some who carefully use tor. But that's a tiny minority. *
dabbledash 6y ago
I think it’s likely that defeating those main selling points is not accidental
- analog31 6y ago
  In my view, money is a technology, meaning that a money system does not have an inherent purpose, but is designed to serve specific purposes. For instance I think that the US money system is "designed" to serve as a medium of exchange, a temporary store of value, and a tool of government economic policy. Bitcoin might have been designed with some other purposes in mind. It could also be co-opted by a government. For instance, I suspect that subsidized energy for bitcoin mining represents a government monetary policy, but I don't know the extent of the influence or its real purpose. Moreover, like a technology, people will use money if it's useful to them. For instance people in countries with "bad" money will often use it for daily expenses, but move the bulk of their assets into instruments based on the currencies of the US, Europe, etc.
  - dabbledash 6y ago
    I’m far from an expert in these things, but to me the benefits of bitcoin are: 1) giving individuals a way to exchange money digitally without it being tied to their offline identity directly (cash) and 2) providing a currency that can’t be manipulated directly by government monetary policy. I assume banning it and replacing it with something from the government is intended to avoid those things intentionally, and isn’t some accident they stumbled into.
    - analog31 6y ago
      Indeed, I'd separate the two policies. On the one hand, providing a digital currency that works like their existing money system, is just an extension of their existing policy, perhaps a minor technological upgrade. Banning crypto is another policy altogether.
bilater 6y ago
A centralized Digital currency has its place and is coming to all countries eventually. There are benefits such as easy disbursement of money to the masses (UBI) by depositing it directly into their wallets, efficient taxation and more. Look into CBDCs.
- PoignardAzur 6y ago
  I don't think the primary objection to UBI is "But how can we solve the logistic challenge transferring money to all these people?"
  - bilater 6y ago
    The bigger obstacle is having to go through congress to approve disbursement of money as opposed to it being a central bank policy.
- ganeshkrishnan 6y ago
  The current currency is already digital. Something like 90% of all currencies (including USD, INR) in the world only exists digitally

m3kw9 6y ago

Digital currency can different than crypto currencies. The point is they want centralization.

omk 6y ago
Digital currency is no different that what already exists in terms of digital representation of one's holding. Really curious to see how the tax payer is going to pay for a glorified database and what value is derived from it.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- ampdepolymerase 6y ago
  How fast is clearing and settlement in traditional Indian banking?
  - geektips 6y ago
    It depends on the system used for transaction[0]. For transaction under $1300 settlements are instant, while for amount more than that it ranges from 30 minutes to 24 hours. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payment_and_settlement_systems_in_India https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payment_and_settlement_syste...
    - manquer 6y ago
      During working hours on week days for largers amounts RTGS is real time and minimum amount is $2500 and is few seconds fast.
- analog31 6y ago
  If they are anything like the US, then they already have a sophisticated database of financial transactions in support of their tax system and national security apparatus.
- louloulou 6y ago
  It's just a round-a-bout way of getting rid of cash so they can surveil all transactions

meowkit 6y ago

> An official cryptocurrency run by the Reserve Bank of India defeats one of the main selling points of a decentralized cryptocurrency... You can still have a centralized token asset as your currency. It defeats the purpose of open source and public blockchain utility, but gives a government massive control over its currency.

teawrecks 6y ago
But then what's the point? You can already achieve the same outcome way more efficiently using existing centralized methods.
- doovd 6y ago
  Ye idk what the guy above you was trying to say TBH
- gogopuppygogo 6y ago
  Better tools to government surveillance of citizens is the goal
- chii 6y ago
  > using existing centralized methods. gives them an excuse to ban an uncontrollable currency/asset. But the paradoxical thing is that if the gov't creates their own crypto they control (and ban the "real" decentralized crypto), they give legitimacy to the idea of crypto, and thus, make bitcoins and other uncontrollable cryptos even more popular. You can't actually ban crypto, anymore than you can ban maths.
  - londons_explore 6y ago
    A government could totally ban crypto. If I wanted to do so as a leader I would: * Log which citizens visited any crypto related domains (exchanges, crypto wallet app servers etc.) * Make a law banning the holding or exchange of crypto. Give everyone 1 week to comply. * Make a government address to send coins to for disposal, and publish a form to fill in to say you have disposed of your holdings. * Contact everyone in your log telling they need to fill in the form (even to declare they no longer have any holdings). * After the deadline, arrest anyone who has not filled in the form or who declares zero holdings and subsequently visits exchanges etc. * Sure, this method will miss some who carefully use tor. But that's a tiny minority. *

dabbledash 6y ago

I think it’s likely that defeating those main selling points is not accidental

analog31 6y ago
In my view, money is a technology, meaning that a money system does not have an inherent purpose, but is designed to serve specific purposes. For instance I think that the US money system is "designed" to serve as a medium of exchange, a temporary store of value, and a tool of government economic policy. Bitcoin might have been designed with some other purposes in mind. It could also be co-opted by a government. For instance, I suspect that subsidized energy for bitcoin mining represents a government monetary policy, but I don't know the extent of the influence or its real purpose. Moreover, like a technology, people will use money if it's useful to them. For instance people in countries with "bad" money will often use it for daily expenses, but move the bulk of their assets into instruments based on the currencies of the US, Europe, etc.
- dabbledash 6y ago
  I’m far from an expert in these things, but to me the benefits of bitcoin are: 1) giving individuals a way to exchange money digitally without it being tied to their offline identity directly (cash) and 2) providing a currency that can’t be manipulated directly by government monetary policy. I assume banning it and replacing it with something from the government is intended to avoid those things intentionally, and isn’t some accident they stumbled into.
  - analog31 6y ago
    Indeed, I'd separate the two policies. On the one hand, providing a digital currency that works like their existing money system, is just an extension of their existing policy, perhaps a minor technological upgrade. Banning crypto is another policy altogether.

bilater 6y ago

A centralized Digital currency has its place and is coming to all countries eventually. There are benefits such as easy disbursement of money to the masses (UBI) by depositing it directly into their wallets, efficient taxation and more. Look into CBDCs.

PoignardAzur 6y ago
I don't think the primary objection to UBI is "But how can we solve the logistic challenge transferring money to all these people?"
- bilater 6y ago
  The bigger obstacle is having to go through congress to approve disbursement of money as opposed to it being a central bank policy.
ganeshkrishnan 6y ago
The current currency is already digital. Something like 90% of all currencies (including USD, INR) in the world only exists digitally